Stephen Shibata

Southwest Oncology Group study S0413: a phase II trial of lapatinib (GW572016) as first-line therapy in patients with advanced or metastatic gastric cancer

Background: Lapatinib (GW572016) is a dual tyrosine kinase inhibitor of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2/ErbB2), which are reported as overexpressed in 15%–45% of gastric cancers, making them potential targets. Patients and methods: The primary objective of this study was to assess response rate. Secondary objectives included overall survival (OS), toxicity, and the relationship of EGFR, ErbB2, and markers of angiogenesis with clinical outcome. Lapatinib was administered to chemonaive metastatic gastric cancer patients at a dose of 1500 mg orally daily for 28 days. Results: The study enrolled 47 patients from February 2005 until May 2006. Four patients (9%) had a confirmed partial response (PR), 1 (2%) had an unconfirmed PR, and 10 (23%) had stable disease. Median (95% confidence interval) time to treatment failure was 1.9 (1.6–3.1) months and OS was 4.8 (3.2–7.4) months. Significant adverse events: one grade 4 cardiac ischemia/infarction, one grade 4 fatigue, and one grade 4 emesis. One treatment-related death was due to central nervous system ischemia. An exploratory analysis of markers revealed gene expression of HER2, interleukin (IL)-8 and genomic polymorphisms IL-8, and vascular endothelial growth factor correlated with OS. Conclusions: Lapatinib is well tolerated, with modest single-agent activity in advanced/metastatic gastric cancer patients. Potential molecular correlatives were identified which warrant further validation.

Phase I and Pharmacokinetic Study of Imatinib Mesylate in Patients With Advanced Malignancies and Varying Degrees of Renal Dysfunction : A Study by the National Cancer Institute Organ Dysfunction Working Group

PURPOSE This study was undertaken to determine the safety, dose-limiting toxicities (DLT), maximum-tolerated dose (MTD), and pharmacokinetics of imatinib in cancer patients with renal impairment and to develop dosing guidelines for imatinib in such patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS Sixty adult patients with advanced solid tumors and varying renal function (normal, creatinine clearance [CrCL] >or= 60 mL/min; mild dysfunction, CrCL 40 to 59 mL/min; moderate dysfunction, CrCL 20 to 39 mL/min; and severe dysfunction, CrCL < 20 mL/min) received daily imatinib doses of 100 to 800 mg. Treatment cycles were 28 days long. RESULTS The MTD was not reached for any group. DLTs occurred in two mild group patients (600 and 800 mg) and two moderate group patients (200 and 600 mg). Serious adverse events (SAEs) were more common in the renal dysfunction groups than in the normal group (P = .0096). There was no correlation between dose and SAEs in any group. No responses were observed. Several patients had prolonged stable disease. Imatinib exposure, expressed as dose-normalized imatinib area under the curve, was significantly greater in the mild and moderate groups than in the normal group. There was a positive correlation between serum alpha-1 acid glycoprotein (AGP) concentration and plasma imatinib, and an inverse correlation between plasma AGP concentration and imatinib clearance. Urinary excretion accounted for 3% to 5% of the daily imatinib dose. CONCLUSION Daily imatinib doses up to 800 or 600 mg were well tolerated by patients with mild and moderate renal dysfunction, respectively, despite their having increased imatinib exposure.

High-dose chemotherapy and stem-cell rescue in the treatment of high-risk breast cancer: prognostic indicators of progression-free and overall survival.

PURPOSE To examine the predictive value of tumor- and treatment-specific prognostic indicators of relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with high-risk breast cancer (HRBC) treated with high-dose chemotherapy (HDCT) and stem-cell rescue. PATIENTS AND METHODS Between June 1989 and September 1994, 114 patients with HRBC (stage II with > or = 10 axillary lymph nodes involved, stage IIIA, and stage IIIB inflammatory carcinoma) received adjuvant chemotherapy followed by HDCT with etoposide, cyclophosphamide, and either doxorubicin (CAVP) or cisplatin (CCVP). Variables analyzed included stage, tumor size, number of axillary nodes involved, grade and receptor status, and types of adjuvant chemotherapy and radiation therapy and HDCT. RESULTS With a median follow-up time of 46 months (range, 23 to 93), Kaplan-Meier estimates of 3.5-year OS for stage II, IIIA, and IIIB HRBC are 82% (95% confidence interval [CI], 67% to 97%), 79% (95% CI, 67% to 91%), and 72% (95% CI, 53% to 91%); RFS estimates are 71% (95% CI, 56% to 85%), 57% (95% CI, 43% to 72%), and 50% (95% CI, 29% to 71%) irrespective of the HDCT regimen. In univariate analysis, the risk of relapse was lower for patients with progesterone receptor (PR)-positive tumors (risk ratio [RR], 0.43; 95% CI, 0.22 to 0.81; P = .01) and higher for patients with inflammatory carcinoma (RR, 2.20; 95% CI, 1.02 to 4.76; P = .05). OS was better for patients with PR (RR, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.55; P = .003) and estrogen receptor (ER)-positive tumors (RR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.17 to 1.02; P = .05); OS was worse for patients with high-grade primary tumors (RR, 4.08; 95% CI, 1.21-13.7; P = .02). In multivariate analysis, PR positivity was associated with improved RFS (P = .01) and OS (P = .001). CONCLUSION HDCT in selected patients with HRBC is safe and warrants further evaluation. Patients with receptor-negative, high-grade, or inflammatory tumors require improvement in their therapeutic options. Better assessment of the role of HDCT awaits completion of ongoing randomized trials.

Treatment of germ cell cancer with two cycles of high-dose ifosfamide, carboplatin, and etoposide with autologous stem-cell support.

PURPOSE To evaluate the activity of two cycles of high-dose ifosfamide, carboplatin, and etoposide (ICE) with autologous hematopoietic progenitor cell support (aHPCS) in patients with poor-prognosis, chemotherapeutically sensitive germ cell cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Twenty patients with germ cell tumor who had persistent disease or relapse from standard-risk or high-risk presentation were entered on this pilot study. The entry criteria included relapsed gonadal and extragonadal germ cell cancer unlikely to be cured by standard salvage therapy but without proven refractoriness to chemotherapy. Treatment consisted of two cycles of ICE chemotherapy with mesna uroprotection and aHPCS. On the first cycle, ifosfamide (IFX), 2 gm/m2; carboplatin, 400 mg/m2; and etoposide, 20 mg/kg, were administered on days -6, -5, and -4. On the second cycle, the doses and schedule of carboplatin and etoposide were identical, and patients with normal renal function received additional IFX, 2 g/m2 on day -3 and 1 g/ m2 on day -2. Mesna, 600 mg/m2 every 6 hours, was given until 24 hours following the final dose of IFX on each cycle, and autologous bone marrow and/or peripheral stem-cells were infused on day 0. RESULTS All twenty patients are assessable for toxicity and current disease status. Two patients received only one cycle of therapy, one because of the development of active hepatitis C following cycle 1, and one because of renal insufficiency. No patient died as a result of protocol therapy, and no patient developed debilitating peripheral neuropathy, symptomatic hearing loss, or severe renal insufficiency requiring dialysis. The median time to recovery of > or = 500 neutrophils/microL and platelets > or = 50,000/microL was day +11 and day +15, respectively. The median maximum creatinine was 1.6 mg/dL on each treatment cycle, and there was no other significant organ toxicity. With a median follow-up of 45 months, nine patients are alive and disease-free following protocol chemotherapy. One patient with embryonal cancer developed progressive pulmonary metastases 3 months after completing high-dose therapy, underwent complete resection of lung metastases, and remains disease-free at 63+ months. Eight patients are continuously disease free at 23+ to 70+ months after protocol therapy. Eleven patients died of progressive disease between 4 and 23 months following completion of treatment. CONCLUSION These results compare favorably to other studies in similarly selected patients undergoing salvage therapy with one or two cycles of chemotherapy containing high-dose carboplatin and etoposide with or without cyclophosphamide (CTX) or IFX. The excellent safety and tolerability profile of this regimen and its encouraging activity in poor-prognosis patients make it worthy of further study as part of initial therapy in randomized protocols for high-risk disease and early in the treatment of relapsed germ cell cancer.

Neurophysiological Study of Peripheral Neuropathy after High-Dose Paclitaxel: Lack of Neuroprotective Effect of Amifostine

Purpose: To determine if there is a beneficial effect of amifostine in preventing or reducing the neuropathy induced by high-dose paclitaxel. Methods: Breast cancer patients receiving high-dose infusional paclitaxel (725 mg/m2/24 h) in combination with doxorubicin (165 mg/m2/96 h) and cyclophosphamide (100 mg/kg/2 h; ACT) were studied on two autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplant protocols, one with and one without amifostine (740 mg/m2 administered over 10 min before and 12 h after initiation of the paclitaxel infusion). Patients were evaluated before ACT and 20–40 days later with neurological examination, a composite peripheral neuropathy score, peroneal and sural nerve conduction studies, and quantitative sensory testing. Results: There was no significant difference in paclitaxel maximum concentration, systemic clearance, or area under the curve determinations. Narcotic requirement as well as recovery of hematopoietic counts were also similar in subjects with or without amifostine. After ACT was administered, there was a decrease in peroneal nerve compound muscle action potential amplitude and sural nerve sensory action potential amplitude, as well as an increase in vibratory and cold detection thresholds. Clinical composite peripheral neuropathy scores were similar despite amifostine treatment; and logarithm to the base 2 ratios post/pre ACT showed no significant effect of amifostine on peroneal nerve compound muscle action potential, sural nerve sensory action potential, vibratory detection thresholds, or cold detection thresholds. All subjects had acroparesthesias and lost their ankle deep-tendon reflexes after administration of ACT. Conclusions: Single high-dose paclitaxel produces predictable clinical and neurophysiological changes so that patients receiving high-dose therapy are ideal subjects to test the effectiveness of neuroprotective agents. Amifostine was ineffective in preventing or reducing the neurotoxicity of high-dose paclitaxel.

Phase I Study of Vorinostat in Patients With Advanced Solid Tumors and Hepatic Dysfunction: A National Cancer Institute Organ Dysfunction Working Group Study

PURPOSE Vorinostat is the first US Food and Drug Administration-approved histone deacetylase inhibitor and is indicated for the treatment of refractory cutaneous T-cell lymphoma. We conducted a phase I study to determine the maximum-tolerated dose and pharmacokinetics of vorinostat in patients with hepatic dysfunction. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients had solid malignancies and acceptable bone marrow and renal function. Hepatic dysfunction was categorized as mild, moderate, or severe by the National Cancer Institute Organ Dysfunction Working Group criteria. Fifteen patients with normal liver function were enrolled as controls. All patients received a single 400-mg dose of vorinostat for pharmacokinetic studies. One week later, daily vorinostat dosing was begun and continued until toxicity or disease progression occurred. The daily vorinostat dose was escalated within each hepatic dysfunction category. Vorinostat plasma concentrations were quantitated by a validated liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry assay and modeled noncompartmentally. RESULTS Fifty-seven patients were enrolled (median age, 59 years; females, n = 24); 42 patients had hepatic dysfunction (16 mild, 15 moderate, and 11 severe). Eight of nine patients with dose-limiting toxicity had grade 4 thrombocytopenia. The recommended vorinostat doses in mild, moderate, and severe hepatic dysfunction were 300, 200, and 100 mg, respectively, on the daily continuous schedule. There were no significant differences in vorinostat pharmacokinetic parameters among the normal or hepatic dysfunction categories. Disease stabilization was noted in 12 patients. Of five patients with adenoid cystic carcinoma, one patient had a partial response, and four patients had stable disease. A patient with papillary thyroid carcinoma had stable disease for more than 2 years. CONCLUSION Patients with varying degrees of hepatic dysfunction require appropriate dose reduction even though vorinostat pharmacokinetics are unaltered.

Postoperative Adjuvant Chemotherapy Use in Patients With Stage II/III Rectal Cancer Treated With Neoadjuvant Therapy: A National Comprehensive Cancer Network Analysis

PURPOSE Practice guidelines recommend that patients who receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiation for locally advanced rectal cancer complete postoperative adjuvant systemic chemotherapy, irrespective of tumor downstaging. PATIENTS AND METHODS The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Colorectal Cancer Database tracks longitudinal care for patients treated at eight specialty cancer centers across the United States and was used to evaluate how frequently patients with rectal cancer who were treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy also received postoperative systemic chemotherapy. Patient and tumor characteristics were examined in a multivariable logistic regression model. RESULTS Between September 2005 and December 2010, 2,073 patients with stage II/III rectal cancer were enrolled in the database. Of these, 1,193 patients receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy were in the analysis, including 203 patients not receiving any adjuvant chemotherapy. For those seen by a medical oncologist, the most frequent reason chemotherapy was not recommended was comorbid illness (25 of 50, 50%); the most frequent reason chemotherapy was not received even though it was recommended or discussed was patient refusal (54 of 74, 73%). After controlling for NCCN Cancer Center and clinical TNM stage in a multivariable logistic model, factors significantly associated with not receiving adjuvant chemotherapy were age, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≥ 1, on Medicaid or indigent compared with private insurance, complete pathologic response, presence of re-operation/wound infection, and no closure of ileostomy/colostomy. CONCLUSION Even at specialty cancer centers, a sizeable minority of patients with rectal cancer treated with curative-intent neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy do not complete postoperative chemotherapy. Strategies to facilitate the ability to complete this third and final component of curative intent treatment are necessary.

Prognostic Indicators and Survival in Patients With Stage IIIB Inflammatory Breast Carcinoma After Dose-Intense Chemotherapy

PURPOSE To improve treatment outcome for patients presenting with inflammatory breast cancer (IBC), we have sequentially developed and tested single and tandem dose-intense chemotherapy regimens (DICT). Tumor- and treatment-related factors were analyzed to generate a prognostic model. PATIENTS AND METHODS Between May 1989 and April 2002, 120 patients received conventional-dose chemotherapy, surgery, and sequentially developed single- or tandem-cycle DICT. Disease- and treatment-specific features were subjected to univariate and multivariate analysis to correlate with outcome. RESULTS At a median follow-up of 61 months (range, 21 to 161 months), estimated 5-year relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) were 44% (95% CI, 34% to 53%) and 64% (95% CI, 55% to 73%), respectively. In an age-adjusted multivariate analysis, RFS was better in patients with estrogen receptor (ER)/progesterone receptor (PR)-positive tumors (P =.002), for patients with fewer than four involved axillary nodes before DICT (P =.01), and in patients treated with radiation therapy (P =.001) and tandem DICT (P =.049). OS was improved in patients with ER/PR-positive tumors (P =.002), in those with fewer than four involved axillary nodes before DICT (P =.03), and in patients treated with radiation therapy (P =.002). CONCLUSION This retrospective analysis suggests that either single or tandem DICT can be administered safely and may benefit selected patients with stage IIIB IBC. Those with receptor-negative IBC and with four or more involved axillary nodes before DICT need improved neoadjuvant and postadjuvant intensification therapy. A prospective randomized trial of single versus tandem DICT would be required to confirm the potential benefit of tandem DICT in the setting of IBC.

Randomized Multicenter Phase II Study of Modified Docetaxel, Cisplatin, and Fluorouracil (DCF) Versus DCF Plus Growth Factor Support in Patients With Metastatic Gastric Adenocarcinoma: A Study of the US Gastric Cancer Consortium

PURPOSE Docetaxel, cisplatin, and fluorouracil (DCF) is a standard first-line three-drug chemotherapy regimen for advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma and is associated with significant toxicity. We examined the safety and efficacy of a modified DCF (mDCF) regimen in a randomized multicenter phase II study. PATIENTS AND METHODS Previously untreated patients with metastatic gastric or GEJ adenocarcinoma were randomly assigned to receive either mDCF (fluorouracil 2,000 mg/m2 intravenously [IV] over 48 hours, docetaxel 40 mg/m2 IV on day 1, cisplatin 40 mg/m2 IV on day 3, every 2 weeks) or parent DCF (docetaxel 75 mg/m2, cisplatin 75 mg/m2, and fluorouracil 750 mg/m2 IV over 5 days with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, every 3 weeks). The study had 90% power to differentiate between 6-month progression-free survival of 26% and 43%, with type I and II error rates of 10% each. An early stopping rule for toxicity was included, defined as grade 3 to 4 adverse event rate > 70% in the first 3 months. RESULTS From November 2006 to June 2010, 85 evaluable patients were enrolled (male, n = 61; female, n = 24; median age, 58 years; Karnofsky performance status, 90%; GEJ, n = 28; gastric, 57). mDCF (n = 54) toxicity rates included 54% grade 3 to 4 toxicity (22% hospitalized) within the first 3 months and 76% grade 3 to 4 toxicity over the course of treatment. The DCF arm (n = 31) closed early because of toxicity, with rates of 71% grade 3 to 4 toxicity (52% hospitalized) within 3 months and 90% grade 3 to 4 toxicity over the course of treatment. Six-month PFS was 63% (95% CI, 48% to 75%) for mDCF and 53% (95% CI, 34% to 69%) for DCF. Median overall survival was improved for mDCF (18.8 v 12.6 months; P = .007). CONCLUSION mDCF is less toxic than parent DCF, even when supported with growth factors, and is associated with improved efficacy. mDCF should be considered a standard first-line option for patients with metastatic gastric or GEJ adenocarcinoma.

Pharmacokinetics and Safety of Bortezomib in Patients with Advanced Malignancies and Varying Degrees of Liver Dysfunction: Phase I NCI Organ Dysfunction Working Group Study NCI-6432

Purpose: The proteasome inhibitor bortezomib undergoes oxidative hepatic metabolism. This study (NCI-6432; NCT00091117) was conducted to evaluate bortezomib pharmacokinetics and safety in patients with varying degrees of hepatic impairment, to inform dosing recommendations in these special populations. Experimental Design: Patients received bortezomib on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 of 21-day cycles. Patients were assigned to four hepatic function groups based on the National Cancer Institute Organ Dysfunction Working Group classification. Those with normal function received bortezomib at the 1.3 mg/m2 standard dose. Patients with severe, moderate, and mild impairment received escalating doses from 0.5, 0.7, and 1.0 mg/m2, respectively, up to a 1.3 mg/m2 maximum. Serial blood samples were collected for 24 hours postdose on days 1 and 8, cycle 1, for bortezomib plasma concentration measurements. Results: Sixty-one patients were treated, including 14 with normal hepatic function and 17, 12, and 18 with mild, moderate, and severe impairment, respectively. Mild hepatic impairment did not alter dose-normalized bortezomib exposure (AUC0-tlast) or Cmax compared with patients with normal function. Mean dose-normalized AUC0-tlast was increased by approximately 60% on day 8 in patients with moderate or severe impairment. Conclusions: Patients with mild hepatic impairment do not require a starting dose adjustment of bortezomib. Patients with moderate or severe hepatic impairment should be started at a reduced dose of 0.7 mg/m2. Clin Cancer Res; 18(10); 2954–63. ©2012 AACR.