Rafael Morales-Barrera
Autonomous University of Barcelona
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Rafael Morales-Barrera.
Cancer Discovery | 2017
Cristina Saura; Desamparados Roda; Susana Roselló; Mafalda Oliveira; Teresa Macarulla; Jose Alejandro Perez-Fidalgo; Rafael Morales-Barrera; Juan Manuel Sanchis-García; Luna Musib; Nageshwar Budha; Jin Zhu; Michelle Nannini; Wai Y. Chan; Sandra Sanabria Bohorquez; Raymond D. Meng; Kui Lin; Yibing Yan; Premal Patel; José Baselga; Josep Tabernero; A. Cervantes
Activation of AKT signaling by PTEN loss or PIK3CA mutations occurs frequently in human cancers, but targeting AKT has been difficult due to the mechanism-based toxicities of inhibitors that target the inactive conformation of AKT. Ipatasertib (GDC-0068) is a novel selective ATP-competitive small-molecule inhibitor of AKT that preferentially targets active phosphorylated AKT (pAKT) and is potent in cell lines with evidence of AKT activation. In this phase I study, ipatasertib was well tolerated; most adverse events were gastrointestinal and grade 1-2 in severity. The exposures of ipatasertib ≥200 mg daily in patients correlated with preclinical TGI90, and pharmacodynamic studies confirmed that multiple targets (i.e., PRAS40, GSK3β, and mTOR) were inhibited in paired on-treatment biopsies. Preliminary antitumor activity was observed; 16 of 52 patients (30%), with diverse solid tumors and who progressed on prior therapies, had radiographic stable disease, and many of their tumors had activation of AKT. SIGNIFICANCE Potent inhibition of AKT signaling with ipatasertib was associated with a tolerable safety profile and meaningful disease control in a subgroup of patients. Targeting pAKT with an ATP-competitive inhibitor provides a greater therapeutic window than allosteric inhibitors. Further investigation with ipatasertib is ongoing in phase II studies. Cancer Discov; 7(1); 102-13. ©2016 AACR.This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 1.
European Journal of Cancer | 2012
Rafael Morales-Barrera; Joaquim Bellmunt; Cristina Suárez; Claudia Valverde; Marta Guix; César Serrano; Manuel Gallen; Joan Carles
BACKGROUND Cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy is the mainstay of treatment for locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma. However, standard dose schedule of cisplatin cannot be used in patients with impaired renal function. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of gemcitabine and a split dose administration of cisplatin in patients with renal dysfunction. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma with creatinine clearance between 35 and 59 ml/min received gemcitabine 2500 mg/m(2) and cisplatin 35 mg/m(2) on day 1 and day 15 for an every 28 day schedule. RESULTS Between March 2004 and November 2009, 38 patients were treated. Median creatinine clearance was 49 ml/min. Median number of cycles per patient was 3 (1-7). There were 15 partial responses (39%) and 12 patients had stable disease (31%). Median progression free survival and overall survival were 3.5 and 8.5 months (mo), respectively. Grade 3-4 haematological toxicities were: neutropenia 9%, anaemia 6% and thrombocytopenia 16%. No patient developed renal toxicity. CONCLUSIONS Biweekly gemcitabine and cisplatin is an active and feasible regimen in this subset of patients and could be an option for unfit patients. However, results seem not to be superior to those obtained with carboplatin based regimens in this population of patients.
European Urology | 2017
Andrea Necchi; Guru Sonpavde; Salvatore Lo Vullo; Daniele Giardiello; Aristotelis Bamias; Simon J. Crabb; Lauren C. Harshman; Joaquim Bellmunt; Ugo De Giorgi; Cora N. Sternberg; Linda Cerbone; Sylvain Ladoire; Yu Ning Wong; Evan Y. Yu; Simon Chowdhury; Günter Niegisch; Sandy Srinivas; Ulka N. Vaishampayan; Sumanta K. Pal; Neeraj Agarwal; Ajjai Alva; Jack Baniel; Ali Reza Golshayan; Rafael Morales-Barrera; Daniel W. Bowles; Matthew I. Milowsky; Christine Theodore; Dominik R. Berthold; Gedske Daugaard; S. S. Sridhar
BACKGROUND The available prognostic models for overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma (UC) have been derived from clinical trial populations of cisplatin-treated patients. OBJECTIVE To develop a new model based on real-world patients. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Individual patient-level data from 29 centers were collected, including metastatic UC and first-line cisplatin- or carboplatin-based chemotherapy administered between January 2006 and January 2011. INTERVENTION First-line, platinum-based, combination chemotherapy. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS The population was randomly split into a development and a validation cohort. Generalized boosted regression modelling was used to screen out irrelevant variables and address multivariable analyses. Two nomograms were built to estimate OS probability, the first based on baseline factors and platinum agent, the second incorporating objective response (OR). The performance of the above nomograms and that of other available models was assessed. We plotted decision curves to evaluate the clinical usefulness of the two nomograms. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS A total of 1020 patients were analyzed (development: 687, validation: 333). In a platinum-stratified Cox model, significant variables for OS were performance status (p<0.001), white blood cell count (p=0.013), body mass index (p=0.003), ethnicity (p=0.012), lung, liver, or bone metastases (p<0.001), and prior perioperative chemotherapy (p=0.012). The c-index was 0.660. The distribution of the nomogram scores was associated with OR (p<0.001), and incorporating OR into the model further improved the c-index in the validation cohort (0.670). CONCLUSIONS We developed and validated two nomograms for OS to be used before and after completion of first-line chemotherapy for metastatic UC. PATIENT SUMMARY We proposed two models for estimating overall survival of patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma receiving first-line, platinum-based chemotherapy. These nomograms have been developed on real-world patients who were treated outside of clinical trials and may be used irrespective of the chemotherapeutic platinum agent used.
British Journal of Cancer | 2012
A. Ploquin; David Olmos; Denis Lacombe; Roger A'Hern; Alain Duhamel; C. Twelves; Silvia Marsoni; Rafael Morales-Barrera; Jaap Verweij; Emile E. Voest; Patrick Schöffski; Jan H. M. Schellens; A. Kramar; Rebecca Kristeleit; Hendrik-Tobias Arkenau; Stan B. Kaye; Nicolas Penel
Background:Selecting patients with ‘sufficient life expectancy’ for Phase I oncology trials remains challenging. The Royal Marsden Hospital Score (RMS) previously identified high-risk patients as those with ⩾2 of the following: albumin <35 g l−1; LDH > upper limit of normal; >2 metastatic sites. This study developed an alternative prognostic model, and compared its performance with that of the RMS.Methods:The primary end point was the 90-day mortality rate. The new model was developed from the same database as RMS, but it used Chi-squared Automatic Interaction Detection (CHAID). The ROC characteristics of both methods were then validated in an independent database of 324 patients enrolled in European Organization on Research and Treatment of Cancer Phase I trials of cytotoxic agents between 2000 and 2009.Results:The CHAID method identified high-risk patients as those with albumin <33 g l−1 or ⩾33 g l−1, but platelet counts ⩾400.000 mm−3. In the validation data set, the rates of correctly classified patients were 0.79 vs 0.67 for the CHAID model and RMS, respectively. The negative predictive values (NPV) were similar for the CHAID model and RMS.Conclusion:The CHAID model and RMS provided a similarly high level of NPV, but the CHAID model gave a better accuracy in the validation set. Both CHAID model and RMS may improve the screening process in phase I trials.
Annals of Oncology | 2014
P A Cassier; Polivka; Ian Judson; J-C. Soria; Nicolas Penel; Silvia Marsoni; Jaap Verweij; Jan H. M. Schellens; Rafael Morales-Barrera; Patrick Schöffski; Emile E. Voest; Carlos Gomez-Roca; T. R. J. Evans; Ruth Plummer; E. Gallerani; Stan B. Kaye; David Olmos
BACKGROUND Although sarcomas account for only 1% of all solid tumours, patients with sarcomas comprise a larger proportion of patients entering phase I trials, due to the limited number of registered or active drugs for these diseases. To help in patient selection, we evaluated the utility of the predictive Royal Marsden Score which had been derived in carcinoma patients. In addition, we analysed efficacy and toxicity regarding the sarcoma population enrolled in phase I trials. PATIENTS AND METHODS We used data from a European Database comprising 2182 patients treated in phase I trials in 14 European institutions between 2005 and 2007. RESULTS One hundred and seventy-eight patients diagnosed with advanced sarcoma or other mesenchymal tumours were identified and accounted for 217 phase I trial participations during the study period. Histological type, class of drug, number of metastatic sites, high serum lactate dehydrogenase activity (LDH), low albumin and high white blood cell count were independent prognostic factors. Poor performance status (PS), liver metastases and high leucocyte count were associated with increased risk of early death. The class of drug used was the strongest predictor of progression-free survival (PFS) duration, inhibitors of angiogenesis and histone deacetylase giving the best results. Poor PS, high serum LDH and low lymphocyte count correlated with shorter PFS. In this heterogeneous population, PFS with investigational agents appeared comparable with that previously published for patients receiving standard treatments beyond first line. CONCLUSION Prognostic factors in sarcoma patients do not differ from a broader phase I population. Efficacy measures suggest that some patients with sarcoma derive benefit from therapy in this setting which could therefore be considered for patients with no remaining standard therapeutic option.
JAMA Oncology | 2018
Daniel P. Petrylak; Thomas Powles; Joaquim Bellmunt; Fadi S. Braiteh; Yohann Loriot; Rafael Morales-Barrera; Howard A. Burris; Joseph Kim; Beiying Ding; Constanze Kaiser; Marcella Fasso; Carol O’Hear; Nicholas J. Vogelzang
Importance Atezolizumab (anti–programmed death ligand 1) has demonstrated safety and activity in advanced and metastatic urothelial carcinoma, but its long-term clinical profile remains unknown. Objective To report long-term clinical outcomes with atezolizumab therapy for patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma. Design, Setting, and Participants Patients were enrolled in an expansion cohort of an ongoing, open-label, phase 1 study. Median follow-up was 37.8 months (range, >0.7 to 44.4 months). Enrollment occurred between March 2013 and August 2015 at US and European academic medical centers. Eligible patients had measurable disease per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 to 1, and a representative tumor sample. Programmed death ligand 1 expression on immune cells was assessed (VENTANA SP142 assay). Interventions Atezolizumab was given intravenously every 3 weeks until unacceptable toxic effects, protocol nonadherence, or loss of clinical benefit. Main Outcomes and Measures Primary outcome was safety. Secondary outcomes included objective response rate, duration of response, and progression-free survival. Response and overall survival were assessed in key baseline subgroups. Results Ninety-five patients were evaluable (72 [76%] male; median age, 66 years [range, 36-89 years]). Forty-five (47%) received atezolizumab as third-line therapy or greater. Nine patients (9%) had a grade 3 to 4 treatment-related adverse event, mostly within the first treatment year; no serious related adverse events were observed thereafter. One patient (1%) discontinued treatment due to a related event. No treatment-related deaths occurred. Responses occurred in 26% (95% CI, 18%-36%) of patients. Median duration of response was 22.1 months (range, 2.8 to >41.0 months), and median progression-free survival was 2.7 months (95% CI, 1.4-4.3 months). Median overall survival was 10.1 months (95% CI, 7.3-17.0 months); 3-year OS rate was 27% (95% CI, 17%-36%). Response occurred in 40% (95% CI, 26%-55%; n = 40) and 11% (95% CI, 4%-25%; n = 44) of patients with programmed death ligand 1 expression of at least 5% tumor-infiltrating immune cells (IC2/3) or less than 5% (IC0/1), respectively. Median overall survival in patients with IC2/3 and IC0/1 was 14.6 months (95% CI, 9.0 months to not estimable) and 7.6 months (95% CI, 4.7 to 13.9 months), respectively. Conclusions and Relevance Atezolizumab remained well tolerated and provided durable clinical benefit to a heavily pretreated metastatic urothelial carcinoma population in this long-term study. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01375842
Clinical Cancer Research | 2014
Victor Moreno Garcia; David Olmos; Carlos Gomez-Roca; Philippe Cassier; Rafael Morales-Barrera; Gianluca Del Conte; E. Gallerani; Andre T. Brunetto; Patrick Schöffski; Silvia Marsoni; Jan H. M. Schellens; Nicolas Penel; Emile E. Voest; Jeff Evans; Ruth Plummer; Richard Wilson; Josep Tabernero; Jaap Verweij; Stan B. Kaye
Introduction: Because a dose–response relationship is characteristic of conventional chemotherapy, this concept is widely used for the development of novel cytotoxic (CTX) drugs. However, the need to reach the MTD to obtain optimal benefit with molecularly targeted agents (MTA) is controversial. In this study, we evaluated the relationship between dose and efficacy in a large cohort of phase I patients with solid tumors. Experimental Design: We collected data on 1,182 consecutive patients treated in phase I trials in 14 European institutions in 2005–2007. Inclusion criteria were: (i) patients treated within completed single-agent studies in which a maximum-administered dose was defined and (ii) RECIST/survival data available. Results: Seventy-two percent of patients were included in trials with MTA (N = 854) and 28% in trials with CTX (N = 328). The objective response (OR) rate was 3% and disease control at 6 months was 11%. OR for CTX was associated with higher doses (median 92% of MTD); this was not the case for MTA, where patients achieving OR received a median of 50% of MTD. For trials with MTA, patients treated at intermediate doses (40%–80%) had better survival compared with those receiving low or high doses (P = 0.038). On the contrary, there was a direct association between higher dose and better OS for CTX agents (P = 0.003). Conclusion: Although these results support the development of novel CTX based on MTD, we found no direct relationship between higher doses and response with MTA in unselected patients. However, the longest OS was seen in patients treated with MTA at intermediate doses (40%–80% of MTD). Clin Cancer Res; 20(22); 5663–71. ©2014 AACR.
Lancet Oncology | 2017
Jesús García-Donas; A. Font; Begoña Pérez-Valderrama; José Antonio Virizuela; Miquel Ángel Climent; Susana Hernando-Polo; José Ángel Arranz; Maria del Mar LLorente; Nuria Lainez; José Carlos Villa-Guzmán; Begoña Mellado; Aranzazu Gonzalez del Alba; Daniel Castellano; Enrique Gallardo; Urbano Anido; Xavier Garcia del Muro; Montserrat Domenech; Javier Puente; Rafael Morales-Barrera; Jose Luis Perez-Gracia; Joaquim Bellmunt
BACKGROUND Maintenance therapy improves outcomes in various tumour types, but cumulative toxic effects limit the choice of drugs. We investigated whether maintenance therapy with vinflunine would delay disease progression in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma who had achieved disease control with first-line chemotherapy. METHODS We did a randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 2 trial in 21 Spanish hospitals. Eligible patients had locally advanced, surgically unresectable, or metastatic transitional-cell carcinoma of the urothelial tract, adequate organ function, and disease control after four to six cycles of cisplatin and gemcitabine (carboplatin allowed after cycle four). Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive vinflunine or best supportive care until disease progression. We initially used block randomisation with a block size of six. Four lists were created for the two stratification factors of starting dose of vinflunine and presence of liver metastases. After a protocol amendment, number of cisplatin and gemcitabine cycles was added as a stratification factor, and eight lists were created, still with a block size of six. Finally, we changed to a minimisation procedure to reduce the risk of imbalance between groups. Vinflunine was given every 21 days as a 20 min intravenous infusion at 320 mg/m2 or at 280 mg/m2 in patients with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 1, age 75 years or older, previous pelvic radiotherapy, or creatinine clearance lower than 60 mL/min. The primary endpoint was median progression-free survival longer than 5·3 months in the vinflunine group, assessed by modified intention to treat. Comparison of progression-free survival between treatment groups was a secondary endpoint. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01529411. FINDINGS Between April 12, 2012, and Jan 29, 2015, we enrolled 88 patients, of whom 45 were assigned to receive vinflunine and 43 to receive best supportive care. One patient from the vinflunine group was lost to follow-up immediately after randomisation and was excluded from the analyses. One patient in the best supportive care group became ineligible for the study and did not receive treatment due to a delay in enrolment, but was included in the intention-to-treat efficacy analysis. After a median follow-up of 15·6 months (IQR 8·5-26·0), 29 (66%) of 44 patients in the vinflunine group had disease progression and 24 (55%) had died, compared with 36 (84%) of 43 patients with disease progression and 32 (74%) deaths in the best supportive care group. Median progression-free survival was 6·5 months (95% CI 2·0-11·1) in the vinflunine group and 4·2 months (2·1-6·3) in the best supportive care group (hazard ratio 0·59, 95% CI 0·37-0·96, p=0·031). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were neutropenia (eight [18%] of 44 in the vinflunine group vs none of 42 in the best supportive care group), asthenia or fatigue (seven [16%] vs one [2%]), and constipation (six [14%] vs none). 18 serious adverse events were reported in the vinflunine group and 14 in the best supportive care group. One patient in the vinflunine group died from pneumonia that was deemed to be treatment related. INTERPRETATION In patients with disease control after first-line chemotherapy, progression-free survival exceeded the acceptable threshold with vinflunine maintenance therapy. Moreover, progression-free survival was longer with vinflunine maintenance therapy than with best supportive care. Vinflunine maintenance had an acceptable safety profile. Further studies of the role of vinflunine are warranted. FUNDING Pierre-Fabre Médicament.
Cancer Treatment Reviews | 2016
Rafael Morales-Barrera; Cristina Suárez; Ana Martínez de Castro; Fabricio Racca; Claudia Valverde; X. Maldonado; Juan Maria Bastaros; Juan Morote; Joan Carles
Bladder cancer is one of the leading causes of death in Europe and the United States. About 25% of patients with bladder cancer have advanced disease (muscle-invasive or metastatic disease) at presentation and are candidates for systemic chemotherapy. In the setting of metastatic disease, use of cisplatin-based regimens improves survival. However, despite initial high response rates, the responses are typically not durable leading to recurrence and death in the vast majority of these patients with median overall survival of 15months and a 5-year survival rate of ⩽10%. Furthermore, unfit patients for cisplatin have no standard of care for first line therapy in advance disease Most second-line chemotherapeutic agents tested have been disappointing. Newer targeted drugs and immunotherapies are being studied in the metastatic setting, their usefulness in the neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings is also an intriguing area of ongoing research. Thus, new treatment strategies are clearly needed. The comprehensive evaluation of multiple molecular pathways characterized by The Cancer Genome Atlas project has shed light on potential therapeutic targets for bladder urothelial carcinomas. We have focused especially on emerging therapies in locally advanced and metastatic urothelial carcinoma with an emphasis on immune checkpoints inhibitors and FGFR targeted therapies, which have shown great promise in early clinical studies.
European Urology | 2017
Jose Luis Perez-Gracia; Yohann Loriot; Jonathan E. Rosenberg; Thomas Powles; Andrea Necchi; Syed A. Hussain; Rafael Morales-Barrera; M. Retz; Günter Niegisch; Ignacio Duran; Christine Theodore; Enrique Grande; Xiaodong Shen; Jingjing Wang; Betty Nelson; Christina Louise Derleth; Michiel S. van der Heijden
BACKGROUND Patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) who progress after platinum-based chemotherapy have had few treatment options and uniformly poor outcomes. Atezolizumab (anti-programmed death-ligand 1) was approved in the USA for cisplatin-ineligible and platinum-treated mUC based on IMvigor210, a phase 2, single-arm, two-cohort study. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab by the number of prior lines of systemic therapy in patients with pretreated mUC. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS IMvigor210 enrolled 315 patients with mUC with progression during or following platinum-based therapy at 70 international sites between May 2014 and November 2014. Key inclusion criteria included age ≥18 yr, creatinine clearance ≥30ml/min, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1, with no limit on prior lines of treatment. INTERVENTION Patients in this cohort received atezolizumab 1200mg intravenously every 3 wk until loss of clinical benefit. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS Centrally assessed Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors v1.1 objective response rate (ORR), median duration of response, overall survival (OS), and adverse events were evaluated by prior treatment. Potential differences between subgroups were evaluated using log-rank (for OS) and chi-square (for ORR and adverse events frequencies) testing. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS Three hundred and ten patients were efficacy and safety evaluable (median follow-up, 21 mo). Objective responses and prolonged OS occurred across all prespecified subgroups; median duration of response was not reached in most subgroups. In patients without prior systemic mUC therapy (first-line subgroup), ORR was 25% (95% confidence interval: 14-38), and median OS was 9.6 mo (95% confidence interval: 5.9-15.8). No significant differences in efficacy or toxicity by therapy line were observed. CONCLUSIONS Atezolizumab demonstrated comparable efficacy and safety in previously treated patients with mUC across all lines of therapy evaluated. PATIENT SUMMARY We investigated effects of previous treatment in patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma that progressed after platinum-based therapy. Atezolizumab was active and tolerable no matter how many treatment regimens patients had received. ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02108652.