Thomas Gauler

Nivolumab versus Everolimus in Advanced Renal-Cell Carcinoma

BACKGROUND Nivolumab, a programmed death 1 (PD-1) checkpoint inhibitor, was associated with encouraging overall survival in uncontrolled studies involving previously treated patients with advanced renal-cell carcinoma. This randomized, open-label, phase 3 study compared nivolumab with everolimus in patients with renal-cell carcinoma who had received previous treatment. METHODS A total of 821 patients with advanced clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma for which they had received previous treatment with one or two regimens of antiangiogenic therapy were randomly assigned (in a 1:1 ratio) to receive 3 mg of nivolumab per kilogram of body weight intravenously every 2 weeks or a 10-mg everolimus tablet orally once daily. The primary end point was overall survival. The secondary end points included the objective response rate and safety. RESULTS The median overall survival was 25.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 21.8 to not estimable) with nivolumab and 19.6 months (95% CI, 17.6 to 23.1) with everolimus. The hazard ratio for death with nivolumab versus everolimus was 0.73 (98.5% CI, 0.57 to 0.93; P=0.002), which met the prespecified criterion for superiority (P≤0.0148). The objective response rate was greater with nivolumab than with everolimus (25% vs. 5%; odds ratio, 5.98 [95% CI, 3.68 to 9.72]; P<0.001). The median progression-free survival was 4.6 months (95% CI, 3.7 to 5.4) with nivolumab and 4.4 months (95% CI, 3.7 to 5.5) with everolimus (hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.75 to 1.03; P=0.11). Grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 19% of the patients receiving nivolumab and in 37% of the patients receiving everolimus; the most common event with nivolumab was fatigue (in 2% of the patients), and the most common event with everolimus was anemia (in 8%). CONCLUSIONS Among patients with previously treated advanced renal-cell carcinoma, overall survival was longer and fewer grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred with nivolumab than with everolimus. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb; CheckMate 025 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01668784.).

European Consensus Conference on Diagnosis and Treatment of Germ Cell Cancer: A Report of the Second Meeting of the European Germ Cell Cancer Consensus group (EGCCCG): Part I

OBJECTIVES The first consensus report presented by the European Germ Cell Cancer Consensus Group (EGCCCG) in the year 2004 has found widespread approval by many colleagues throughout the world. In November 2006, the group met a second time under the auspices of the Department of Urology of the Amsterdam Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. METHODS Medical oncologists, urological surgeons, radiation oncologists as well as pathologists from several European countries reviewed and discussed the data that had emerged since the 2002 conference, and incorporated the new data into updated and revised guidelines. As for the first meeting, the methodology of evidence-based medicine (EBM) was applied. The results of the discussion were compiled by the writing committee. All participants have agreed to this final update. RESULTS The first part of the consensus paper describes the clinical presentation of the primary tumor, its treatment, the importance and treatment of testicular intraepithelial neoplasia (TIN), histological classification, staging and prognostic factors, and treatment of stage I seminoma and non-seminoma. CONCLUSIONS Whereas the vast majority of the recommendations made in 2004 remain valid 3 yr later, refinements in the treatment of early- and advanced-stage testicular cancer have emerged from clinical trials. Despite technical improvements, expert clinical skills will continue to be one of the major determinants for the prognosis of patients with germ cell cancer. In addition, the particular needs of testicular cancer survivors have been acknowledged.

Value of 18F-Fluoro-2-Deoxy-d-Glucose-Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography in Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer for Prediction of Pathologic Response and Times to Relapse after Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy

Purpose: To determine the value of combined positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) during induction chemotherapy (CTx) followed by chemoradiotherapy (CTx/RTx) for non–small-cell lung cancer to predict histopathologic response in primary tumor and mediastinum and prognosis of the patient. Experimental Design: Fifty consecutive patients with locally advanced non–small-cell lung cancer received induction therapy and, if considered resectable, proceeded to surgery (37 of 50 patients). Patients had at least two repeated 18F-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose (FDG)-PET/CT scans either before treatment (t0) or after induction CTx (t1) or CTx/RTx (t2). Variables from the PET/CT studies [e.g., lesion volume and corrected maximum standardized glucose uptake values (SUVmax,corr)] were correlated with histopathologic response (graded as 3, 2b, or 2a: 0%, >0-10%, or >10% residual tumor cells) and times to failure. Results: Primary tumors showed a percentage decrease in SUVmax,corr during induction significantly larger in grade 2b/3 than in grade 2a responding tumors (67% versus 34% at t1, 73% versus 49% at t2; both P < 0.005). SUVmax,corr at t2 was significantly correlated with histopathologic response in tumors smaller than the median volume (7.5 cm3; r = −0.54, P = 0.02). In the mediastinal lymph nodes, SUVmax,corr values at t2 predicted an ypN0 status with a sensitivity and specificity of 73% and 89%, respectively (SUVmax,corr threshold of 4.1, r = −0.54, P = 0.0005). Freedom from extracerebral relapse was significantly better in grade 2b/3 patients (86% at 16 months versus 20% in 2a responders; P = 0.003) and in patients with a greater percentage decrease in SUVmax,corr in the primary tumor at t2 in relation to t0 than in patients with lesser response (83% at 16 months versus 43%; P = 0.03 for cutoff points between 0.45 and 0.55). Conclusions: SUVmax,corr values from two serial PET/CT scans, before and after three chemotherapy cycles or later, allow prediction of histopathologic response in the primary tumor and mediastinal lymph nodes and have prognostic value.

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.

Gemcitabine plus erlotinib followed by capecitabine versus capecitabine plus erlotinib followed by gemcitabine in advanced pancreatic cancer: final results of a randomised phase 3 trial of the ‘Arbeitsgemeinschaft Internistische Onkologie’ (AIO-PK0104)

Objective AIO-PK0104 investigated two treatment strategies in advanced pancreatic cancer (PC): a reference sequence of gemcitabine/erlotinib followed by 2nd-line capecitabine was compared with a reverse experimental sequence of capecitabine/erlotinib followed by gemcitabine. Methods 281 patients with PC were randomly assigned to 1st-line treatment with either gemcitabine plus erlotinib or capecitabine plus erlotinib. In case of treatment failure (eg, disease progression or toxicity), patients were allocated to 2nd-line treatment with the comparator cytostatic drug without erlotinib. The primary study endpoint was time to treatment failure (TTF) after 1st- and 2nd-line therapy (TTF2; non-inferiority design). KRAS exon 2 mutations were analysed in archival tumour tissue from 173 of the randomised patients. Results Of the 274 eligible patients, 43 had locally advanced and 231 had metastatic disease; 140 (51%) received 2nd-line chemotherapy. Median TTF2 was estimated with 4.2 months in both arms; median overall survival was 6.2 months with gemcitabine/erlotinib followed by capecitabine and 6.9 months with capecitabine/erlotinib followed by gemcitabine, respectively (HR 1.02, p=0.90). TTF for 1st-line therapy (TTF1) was significantly prolonged with gemcitabine/erlotinib compared to capecitabine/erlotinib (3.2 vs 2.2 months; HR 0.69, p=0.0034). Skin rash was associated with both TTF2 (rash grade 0/1/2–4:2.9/4.3/6.7 months, p<0.0001) and survival (3.4/7.0/9.6 months, p<0.0001). Each arm showed a safe and manageable toxicity profile during 1st- and 2nd-line therapy. A KRAS wild-type status (52/173 patients, 30%) was associated with an improved overall survival (HR 1.68, p=0.005). Conclusion Both treatment strategies are feasible and demonstrated comparable efficacy; KRAS may serve as biomarker in patients with advanced PC treated with erlotinib. Trial registration number This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00440167. Significance of this study What is already known on this subject? Gemcitabine-based chemotherapy remains an international standard of care for patients with non-resectable, advanced pancreatic cancer (PC). Anti-EGFR treatment with the tyrosine kinase inhibitor erlotinib, as well as chemotherapy intensification by application of the FOLFIRINOX regimen, both significantly improved overall survival in randomised phase 3 trials. The optimal (sequential) regimen for the use of gemcitabine, erlotinib and the oral fluoropyrimidine capecitabine remains unclear in advanced PC. Molecular predictors for the efficacy of anti-EGFR treatments in PC have not been defined up to now. What are the new findings? The sequential use of gemcitabine, erlotinib and capecitabine is safe and equally effective in PC; gemcitabine appears to be more effective in 1st- and 2nd-line therapy than capecitabine and therefore remains the preferred combination partner for erlotinib. Skin rash is strongly correlated with efficacy outcome measures in PC patients treated with erlotinib. KRAS wild-type status appears to be associated with improved overall survival in patients treated with erlotinib in this AIO study. Significance of this study How might it impact on clinical practice in the foreseeable future? The benefit of adding erlotinib to chemotherapy is restricted to patients that experience skin rash during treatment; non-rash patients are characterised by a very poor outcome and need to be offered novel treatment strategies. Second-line salvage chemotherapy is effective and safe in selected PC patients. KRAS could serve as the first biomarker for improved survival in erlotinib-treated patients; the predictive value of KRAS for erlotinib efficacy remains to be defined prospectively.

Phase III Study of Surgery Versus Definitive Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy Boost in Patients With Resectable Stage IIIA(N2) and Selected IIIB Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer After Induction Chemotherapy and Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy (ESPATUE)

PURPOSE Concurrent chemoradiotherapy with or without surgery are options for stage IIIA(N2) non-small-cell lung cancer. Our previous phase II study had shown the efficacy of induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiotherapy and surgery in patients with IIIA(N2) disease and with selected IIIB disease. Here, we compared surgery with definitive chemoradiotherapy in resectable stage III disease after induction. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with pathologically proven IIIA(N2) and selected patients with IIIB disease that had medical/functional operability received induction chemotherapy, which consisted of three cycles of cisplatin 50 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 and paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) on day 1 every 21 days, as well as concurrent chemoradiotherapy to 45 Gy given as 1.5 Gy twice daily, concurrent cisplatin 50 mg/m(2) on days 2 and 9, and concurrent vinorelbine 20 mg/m(2) on days 2 and 9. Those patients whose tumors were reevaluated and deemed resectable in the last week of radiotherapy were randomly assigned to receive a chemoradiotherapy boost that was risk adapted to between 65 and 71 Gy in arm A or to undergo surgery (arm B). The primary end point was overall survival (OS). RESULTS After 246 of 500 planned patients were enrolled, the trial was closed after the second scheduled interim analysis because of slow accrual and the end of funding, which left the study underpowered relative to its primary study end point. Seventy-five patients had stage IIIA disease and 171 had stage IIIB disease according to the Union for International Cancer Control TNM classification, sixth edition. The median age was 59 years (range, 33 to 74 years). After induction, 161 (65.4%) of 246 patients with resectable tumors were randomly assigned; strata were tumor-node group, prophylactic cranial irradiation policy, and region. Patient characteristics were balanced between arms, in which 81 were assigned to surgery and 80 were assigned to a chemoradiotherapy boost. In arm B, 81% underwent R0 resection. With a median follow-up after random assignment of 78 months, 5-year OS and progression-free survival (PFS) did not differ between arms. Results were OS rates of 44% for arm B and 40% for arm A (log-rank P = .34) and PFS rates of 32% for arm B and 35% for arm A (log-rank P = .75). OS at 5 years was 34.1% (95% CI, 27.6% to 40.8%) in all 246 patients, and 216 patients (87.8%) received definitive local treatment. CONCLUSION The 5-year OS and PFS rates in randomly assigned patients with resectable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer were excellent with both treatments. Both are acceptable strategies for this good-prognosis group.

A German multicenter, randomized phase III trial comparing irinotecan–carboplatin with etoposide–carboplatin as first-line therapy for extensive-disease small-cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND This trial was designed to prove superiority of irinotecan over etoposide combined with carboplatin in extensive-disease small-cell lung cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients were randomly assigned to receive carboplatin area under the curve 5 mg x min/ml either in combination with irinotecan 50 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 (IP) or etoposide 140 mg/m2 on days 1-3 (EP). Primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) at 6 months. Secondary end points were overall survival (OS), response rate, and toxicity. RESULTS Of 226 patients, 216 were eligible. Median PFS was 6.0 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 5.0-7.0] in the IP arm and 6.0 months (95% CI 5.2-6.8) in EP arm (P = 0.07). Median survival was 10.0 months (95% CI 8.4-11.6) and 9.0 months (95% CI 7.6-10.4) in the IP and EP arm (P = 0.06), respectively. Hazard ratios for disease progression and OS were 1.29 (95% CI 0.96-1.73, P = 0.095) and 1.34 (95% CI 0.97-1.85, P = 0.072), respectively. No difference in response rates was observed. Grade 3 and 4 hematologic toxicity favored the IP arm, whereas diarrhea was significantly more frequent in the IP arm. CONCLUSION This trial failed to show superiority of irinotecan over etoposide in combination with carboplatin.

Expression of Amphiregulin and EGFRvIII Affect Outcome of Patients with Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck Receiving Cetuximab–Docetaxel Treatment

Purpose: Constitutive activation of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) as a result of gene amplification, mutation, or overexpression of its ligands has been associated with response to EGFR targeting strategies. The role of these molecular mechanisms for the responsiveness of squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) to cetuximab-containing regimens remains unknown. Experimental Design: Tumor biopsies from 47 patients, enrolled in a single-arm phase II multicenter study for second-line treatment of recurrent or metastatic SCCHN with cetuximab and docetaxel, were analyzed by immunohistochemistry for expression of EGFR, its deletion variant III (EGFRvIII) and its ligand amphiregulin (AREG). The relation between expression levels and disease control rate (DCR) was evaluated by logistic regression. Association between expression levels, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) was determined by Kaplan–Meier analysis, log-rank test, and uni- and multivariate Cox regression analysis. Results: High expression of EGFR, EGFRvIII, and AREG was detected in 73%, 17%, and 45% of SCCHN cases, respectively. Expression levels of EGFR had no impact on PFS or OS. High expression levels of EGFRvIII were significantly associated with reduced DCR and shortened PFS (HR: 3.3, P = 0.005) but not with OS. Patients with high AREG expression in tumor cells had significantly shortened OS (HR: 2.2, P = 0.002) and PFS (HR 2.2, P = 0.019) compared with patients with low expression score. Multivariate Cox analysis revealed an independent association of AREG and EGFRvIII with PFS but only AREG was an independent prognosticator of OS. Conclusions: High EGFRvIII and AREG expression levels identify SCCHN patients who are less likely to benefit from combination treatment with cetuximab and docetaxel. Clin Cancer Res; 17(15); 5197–204. ©2011 AACR.

Significance of Folate Receptor Alpha and Thymidylate Synthase Protein Expression in Patients with Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer Treated with Pemetrexed

Introduction: Folate receptor alpha (FRA) regulates cellular uptake of folates and antifolates. Information about FRA protein expression in metastatic non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is limited. We investigated FRA as a biomarker for pemetrexed-based chemotherapy and compared it with thymidylate synthase (TS), the main target of pemetrexed. Methods: Pretreatment tumor specimens from 207 patients with advanced NSCLC were assessed for FRA and TS protein expression by immunohistochemistry using the H-score (range, 0–300) and correlated to patients’ clinicopathological data, radiographic response, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Results: Low total (cytoplasmic and nuclear) TS protein expression (H-score < 210) was associated with improved PFS (median: 5.6 versus 3.5 months; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.6379, p = 0.0131) and prolonged OS (median: 22.5 versus 11.5 months; HR = 0.5680,p = 0.0107). An association between lower TS levels and response to pemetrexed-based therapy was found—mean H-score 187 ± 5, median 180 for responders versus mean H-score 201 ± 4, median 210, for non-responders, p = 0.0244. High intracellular FRA expression (H-score ≥110) was associated with prolonged OS (28.9 versus 11.7 months, HR = 0.5316, p = 0.0040) and a trend for association with PFS (5.6 versus 4.1 months, HR = 0.7395, p = 0.0801) was noted. Membranous FRA expression was seen in 83% of patients, moreover, high membranous expression (H-score ≥20) was associated with improved PFS (5.6 versus 3.7 months, HR = 0.6445, p = 0.0306) and OS (22.1 versus 11.5 months, HR = 0.5378, p = 0.0131). Conclusions: A large number of NSCLC patients have high expression of FRA and/or a low level of TS expression. Expression levels of FRA and TS were associated with clinical benefit from pemetrexed therapy.

EGFR pathway biomarkers in erlotinib-treated patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: translational results from the randomised, crossover phase 3 trial AIO-PK0104

Background:We aimed to identify molecular epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tissue biomarkers in pancreatic cancer (PC) patients treated with the anti-EGFR agent erlotinib within the phase 3 randomised AIO-PK0104 study.Methods:AIO-PK0104 was a multicenter trial comparing gemcitabine/erlotinib followed by capecitabine with capecitabine/erlotinib followed by gemcitabine in advanced PC; primary study end point was the time-to-treatment failure after first- and second-line therapy (TTF2). Translational analyses were performed for KRAS exon 2 mutations, EGFR expression, PTEN expression, the EGFR intron 1 and exon 13 R497K polymorphism (PM). Biomarker data were correlated with TTF, overall survival (OS) and skin rash.Results:Archival tumour tissue was available from 208 (74%) of the randomised patients. The KRAS mutations were found in 70% (121 out of 173) of patients and exclusively occurred in codon 12. The EGFR overexpression was detected in 89 out of 181 patients (49%) by immunohistochemistry (IHC), and 77 out of 166 patients (46%) had an EGFR gene amplification by fluorescence in-situ hybridisation (FISH); 30 out of 171 patients (18%) had a loss of PTEN expression, which was associated with an inferior TTF1 (first-line therapy; HR 0.61, P=0.02) and TTF2 (HR 0.66, P=0.04). The KRAS wild-type status was associated with improved OS (HR 1.68, P=0.005); no significant OS correlation was found for EGFR–IHC (HR 0.96), EGFR–FISH (HR 1.22), PTEN–IHC (HR 0.77), intron 1 (HR 0.91) or exon 13 R497K PM (HR 0.83). None of the six biomarkers correlated with the occurrence of skin rash.Conclusion:The KRAS wild-type was associated with an improved OS in erlotinib-treated PC patients in this phase 3 study; it remains to be defined whether this association is prognostic or predictive.