Tiziana Usari

First-line crizotinib versus chemotherapy in ALK-positive lung cancer.

BACKGROUND The efficacy of the ALK inhibitor crizotinib as compared with standard chemotherapy as first-line treatment for advanced ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is unknown. METHODS We conducted an open-label, phase 3 trial comparing crizotinib with chemotherapy in 343 patients with advanced ALK-positive nonsquamous NSCLC who had received no previous systemic treatment for advanced disease. Patients were randomly assigned to receive oral crizotinib at a dose of 250 mg twice daily or to receive intravenous chemotherapy (pemetrexed, 500 mg per square meter of body-surface area, plus either cisplatin, 75 mg per square meter, or carboplatin, target area under the curve of 5 to 6 mg per milliliter per minute) every 3 weeks for up to six cycles. Crossover to crizotinib treatment after disease progression was permitted for patients receiving chemotherapy. The primary end point was progression-free survival as assessed by independent radiologic review. RESULTS Progression-free survival was significantly longer with crizotinib than with chemotherapy (median, 10.9 months vs. 7.0 months; hazard ratio for progression or death with crizotinib, 0.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.35 to 0.60; P<0.001). Objective response rates were 74% and 45%, respectively (P<0.001). Median overall survival was not reached in either group (hazard ratio for death with crizotinib, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.54 to 1.26; P=0.36); the probability of 1-year survival was 84% with crizotinib and 79% with chemotherapy. The most common adverse events with crizotinib were vision disorders, diarrhea, nausea, and edema, and the most common events with chemotherapy were nausea, fatigue, vomiting, and decreased appetite. As compared with chemotherapy, crizotinib was associated with greater reduction in lung cancer symptoms and greater improvement in quality of life. CONCLUSIONS Crizotinib was superior to standard first-line pemetrexed-plus-platinum chemotherapy in patients with previously untreated advanced ALK-positive NSCLC. (Funded by Pfizer; PROFILE 1014 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01154140.).

Intracranial Efficacy of Crizotinib Versus Chemotherapy in Patients With Advanced ALK-Positive Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Results From PROFILE 1014

PURPOSE Intracranial efficacy of first-line crizotinib versus chemotherapy was compared prospectively in the phase III PROFILE 1014 study in ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients were randomly assigned to receive crizotinib (250 mg twice daily; n = 172) or chemotherapy (pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2) plus cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) or carboplatin at area under the curve 5 to 6, every 3 weeks for ≤ six cycles; n = 171). Patients with stable treated brain metastases (tBM) were eligible. Intracranial efficacy was assessed at baseline and every 6 or 12 weeks in patients with or without known brain metastases (BM), respectively; intracranial time to tumor progression (IC-TTP; per protocol) and intracranial disease control rate (IC-DCR; post hoc) were measured. The intent-to-treat population was also assessed. RESULTS Of 343 patients in the intent-to-treat population, 23% had tBM at baseline. A nonsignificant IC-TTP improvement was observed with crizotinib in the intent-to-treat population (hazard ratio [HR], 0.60; P = .069), patients with tBM (HR, 0.45; P = .063), and patients without BM (HR, 0.69; P = .323). Among patients with tBM, IC-DCR was significantly higher with crizotinib versus chemotherapy at 12 weeks (85% v 45%, respectively; P < .001) and 24 weeks (56% v 25%, respectively; P = .006). Progression-free survival was significantly longer with crizotinib versus chemotherapy in both subgroups (tBM present: HR, 0.40; P < .001; median, 9.0 v 4.0 months, respectively; BM absent: HR, 0.51; P < .001; median, 11.1 v 7.2 months, respectively) and in the intent-to-treat population (HR, 0.45; P < .001; median, 10.9 v 7.0 months, respectively). CONCLUSION Compared with chemotherapy, crizotinib demonstrated a significantly higher IC-DCR in patients with tBM. Improvements in IC-TTP were not statistically significant in patients with or without tBM, although sensitivity to detect treatment differences in or between the two subgroups was low.

Phase II Study of Sunitinib in Patients with Non-small Cell Lung Cancer and Irradiated Brain Metastases

Introduction: Brain metastases frequently cause significant morbidity in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Sunitinib is a multitargeted inhibitor of tyrosine kinase receptors, including vascular endothelial growth factor receptors and platelet-derived growth factor receptors, which has single-agent antitumor activity in refractory NSCLC. This phase II study evaluated the antitumor activity and safety of sunitinib in patients with pretreated NSCLC and irradiated brain metastases. Methods: Patients received sunitinib 37.5 mg on a continuous daily dosing schedule. The primary end point was progression-free survival. Secondary end points included overall survival, patient-reported outcomes, and safety, including risk of intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) associated with focal neurological deficit. Results: Sixty-four patients received sunitinib (median age 61 years), most (83%) had received prior systemic therapy, 63% had adenocarcinoma, and 19% had squamous cell carcinoma; most (55%) were never-smokers. Median progression-free survival was 9.4 weeks (90% confidence interval [CI]: 7.5–13.1), and median overall survival was 25.1 weeks (95% CI: 13.4–35.5). The most common treatment-emergent (all-causality) nonhematologic toxicities (any grade) were fatigue (38%) and decreased appetite and constipation (both 25%). The most common grade 3/4 nonhematologic toxicities were dyspnea (9%) and fatigue (8%). Lymphopenia (20%) and neutropenia (13%) were the most common grade 3/4 hematologic abnormalities. Serious neurologic adverse events occurred in six patients (9%), and none were treatment-related. No cases of ICH were reported. Conclusions: Sunitinib administration on a continuous daily dosing schedule in patients with NSCLC and brain metastases was safe and manageable, with no increased risk of ICH.

A randomized, double-blind, phase II study of erlotinib with or without sunitinib for the second-line treatment of metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC)

BACKGROUND Combined inhibition of vascular, platelet-derived, and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) pathways may overcome refractoriness to single agents in platinum-pretreated non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS This randomized, double-blind, multicenter, phase II trial evaluated sunitinib 37.5 mg/day plus erlotinib 150 mg/day versus placebo plus erlotinib continuously in 4-week cycles. Eligible patients had histologically confirmed stage IIIB or IV NSCLC previously treated with one or two chemotherapy regimens, including one platinum-based regimen. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) by an independent central review. RESULTS One hundred and thirty-two patients were randomly assigned, and the median duration of follow-up was 17.7 months. The median PFS was 2.8 versus 2.0 months for the combination versus erlotinib alone (HR 0.898, P = 0.321). The median overall survival (OS) was 8.2 versus 7.6 months (HR 1.066, P = 0.617). Objective response rates (ORRs) were 4.6% and 3.0%, respectively. Sunitinib plus erlotinib was fairly well tolerated although most treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were more frequent than with erlotinib alone: diarrhea (55% versus 33%), rash (41% versus 30%), fatigue (31% versus 25%), decreased appetite (30% versus 13%), nausea (28% versus 14%), and thrombocytopenia (13% versus 0%). CONCLUSIONS The addition of sunitinib to erlotinib did not significantly improve PFS in patients with advanced, platinum-pretreated NSCLC.

Phase II Study of Crizotinib in East Asian Patients With ROS1-Positive Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

Purpose Approximately 1% to 2% of non-small-cell lung cancers (NSCLCs) harbor a c-ros oncogene 1 ( ROS1) rearrangement. Crizotinib, an inhibitor of anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK), ROS1, and MET, has shown marked antitumor activity in a small expansion cohort of patients with ROS1-positive advanced NSCLC from an ongoing phase I study. We assessed the efficacy and safety of crizotinib in the largest cohort of patients with ROS1-positive advanced NSCLC. Patients and Methods This phase II, open-label, single-arm trial enrolled East Asian patients with ROS1-positive (assessed through validated AmoyDx assay [Amoy Diagnostics, Xiamen, China] at three regional laboratories) advanced NSCLC who had received three or fewer lines of prior systemic therapies. Patients were to receive oral crizotinib at a starting dose of 250 mg twice daily and continued treatment until Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1-defined progression (by independent radiology review [IRR]), unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal of consent. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR) by IRR. Results In the efficacy and safety analyses, 127 patients were included, with 49.6% still receiving treatment at data cutoff. ORR by IRR was 71.7% (95% CI, 63.0% to 79.3%), with 17 complete responses and 74 partial responses. ORRs were similar irrespective of the number of prior lines of therapy, and responses were durable (median duration of response, 19.7 months; 95% CI, 14.1 months to not reached). Median progression-free survival by IRR was 15.9 months (95% CI, 12.9 to 24.0 months). No new safety signals associated with crizotinib were reported. Conclusion This study demonstrated clinically meaningful benefit and durable responses with crizotinib in East Asian patients with ROS1-positive advanced NSCLC. Crizotinib was generally well tolerated, with a safety profile consistent with previous reports.

An exploratory study of sunitinib in combination with docetaxel and trastuzumab as first-line therapy for HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer

BACKGROUND This exploratory study assessed the safety, pharmacokinetics, and antitumor activity of sunitinib combined with docetaxel and trastuzumab. METHODS Patients with unresectable, locally recurrent or metastatic human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)+ breast cancer received sunitinib plus docetaxel and trastuzumab. Sunitinib was administered at 37.5 mg/day for 2 weeks on treatment followed by 1 week off (Schedule 2/1). The primary endpoint was safety; secondary endpoints included pharmacokinetics and antitumor activity. RESULTS Twenty-six patients enrolled; 24 received at least one dose of sunitinib plus docetaxel and trastuzumab, and one patient received one dose of docetaxel and trastuzumab only. These 25 treated patients were evaluable for safety. Twenty-three patients discontinued the study, primarily due to disease progression. The planned dose of sunitinib was maintained in 10 patients and reduced at least once to 25 mg/day in 14 patients. The most common grade 3/4 non-hematologic adverse events were fatigue/asthenia (28%), diarrhea (16%), stomatitis (12%), vomiting (8%) and dyspnea (8%). Neutropenia was reported in all 24 evaluable patients; most events were grade 4. Three grade 1-3 cardiac adverse events occurred. Sunitinib and docetaxel levels were consistent with known single-agent levels, suggesting that there were no clinically relevant drug-drug interactions. Of 22 evaluable patients, 16 (73%) experienced an objective response (all confirmed partial responses). CONCLUSIONS Sunitinib combined with docetaxel and trastuzumab had an acceptable toxicity profile and showed preliminary antitumor activity as first-line treatment for metastatic HER2+ breast cancer.

Sunitinib Plus Erlotinib for the Treatment of Advanced/Metastatic Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Lead-In Study

Background: This randomized, double-blind, multicenter study evaluated sunitinib plus erlotinib versus placebo plus erlotinib. Subjects with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer had received prior treatment with a platinum-based regimen. Here, we report safety, pharmacokinetics, and antitumor activity of the combination of sunitinib and erlotinib. Methods: Lead-in subjects in this phase II study received sunitinib 37.5 mg/d and erlotinib 150 mg/d. Safety, including dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs, cohort 1 only), pharmacokinetic profiles, and antitumor activity were investigated (cohorts 1 and 2). Results: Thirty patients were evaluated. The combination of sunitinib and erlotinib was tolerable. Diarrhea (76.9%), fatigue (61.5%), and decreased appetite (53.8%) were the most frequent adverse events in cohort 1; and diarrhea (52.9%) and rash (41.2%) were the most frequent adverse events in cohort 2. DLTs were observed (fatigue, n = 2 and paronychial inflammation, n = 1) in three of 13 patients evaluated for DLTs. Geometric mean ratios for the maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) and area under plasma concentration–time profile from time 0 to 24 hours of erlotinib with and without sunitinib were 1.05 and 1.03, respectively. Corresponding values for sunitinib with and without erlotinib were 0.62 and 0.62 for sunitinib, 2.13 and 2.07 for SU12662; and 0.81 and 0.79 for total drug. Three patients experienced partial response as per response evaluation criteria in solid tumor. Conclusion: A dosage of sunitinib 37.5 mg/d concurrently with erlotinib 150 mg/d was tolerable and established the recommended combinatorial dose in subjects with platinum-refractory non–small-cell lung cancer. Coadministration of sunitinib with erlotinib does not affect the pharmacokinetics of erlotinib, but may result in decreased exposure to sunitinib.

Phase I Results from a Study of Crizotinib in Combination with Erlotinib in Patients with Advanced Nonsquamous Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer

Introduction: This phase I trial was conducted to determine the safety, maximum tolerated dose (MTD)/recommended phase II dose, and efficacy of crizotinib plus erlotinib in patients with advanced NSCLC. Methods: Patients with NSCLC and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 2 after failure of one or two prior chemotherapy regimens were eligible. Erlotinib, 100 mg, was given continuously once daily starting between day −14 and −7; crizotinib, 200 mg twice daily (dose level 1) or 150 mg twice daily (dose level −1), was added continuously beginning on day 1 of treatment cycle 1. Potential pharmacokinetic interactions between crizotinib and erlotinib were evaluated. Results: Twenty‐seven patients received treatment; 26 received crizotinib plus erlotinib. Frequent adverse events were diarrhea, rash, decreased appetite, and fatigue. Dose‐limiting toxicities were dehydration, diarrhea, dry eye, dysphagia, dyspepsia, esophagitis and vomiting. The MTD was crizotinib, 150 mg twice daily, with erlotinib, 100 mg once daily. Crizotinib increased the erlotinib area under the concentration‐time curve 1.5‐fold (dose level −1) and 1.8‐fold (dose level 1). The plasma level of crizotinib appeared to be unaffected by coadministration of erlotinib. Two patients whose tumors harbored activating EGFR mutations achieved confirmed partial responses, one at each crizotinib dose level. Conclusions: The MTD of the combination of crizotinib and erlotinib in patients with advanced NSCLC was crizotinib, 150 mg twice daily, with erlotinib, 100 mg once daily, which is less than the approved dose of either agent. The phase II portion of the study was not initiated.

Final Overall Survival Analysis From a Study Comparing First-Line Crizotinib Versus Chemotherapy in ALK-Mutation-Positive Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

Purpose The phase III PROFILE 1014 trial compared crizotinib with chemotherapy as first-line treatment in patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) -positive advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer. Here, we report the final overall survival (OS) results. Patients and Methods Patients were randomly assigned to receive oral crizotinib 250 mg twice daily (n = 172) or intravenous pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 plus cisplatin 75 mg/m2 or carboplatin (area under the concentration-time curve of 5 to 6 mg·mL/min) every 3 weeks for a maximum of six cycles (n = 171). Crossover to crizotinib was permitted after disease progression. OS was analyzed using a stratified log-rank test and a prespecified rank-preserving structural failure time model to account for crossover. Results Median follow-up duration for OS was approximately 46 months for both arms. In the chemotherapy arm, 144 patients (84.2%) received crizotinib in subsequent lines. Hazard ratio for OS was 0.760 (95% CI, 0.548 to 1.053; two-sided P = .0978). Median OS was not reached (NR) with crizotinib (95% CI, 45.8 months to NR) and 47.5 months with chemotherapy (95% CI, 32.2 months to NR). Survival probability at 4 years was 56.6% (95% CI, 48.3% to 64.1%) with crizotinib and 49.1% (95% CI, 40.5% to 57.1%) with chemotherapy. After crossover adjustment, there was an improvement in OS that favored crizotinib (hazard ratio, 0.346; 95% bootstrap CI, 0.081 to 0.718). The longest OS was observed in crizotinib-treated patients who received a subsequent ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor. No new safety signals were identified. Conclusion The final analysis of the PROFILE 1014 study provides a new benchmark for OS in patients with ALK-rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer and highlights the benefit of crizotinib for prolonging survival in this patient population.

Crizotinib Versus Chemotherapy in Asian Patients with Advanced ALK-positive Non-small Cell Lung Cancer

Purpose Crizotinib has demonstrated superior progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rates (ORRs) versus chemotherapy in previously treated and untreated patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We report the safety and efficacy of crizotinib in Asian subpopulations of two global phase III trials. Materials and Methods This analysis evaluated previously treated and untreated patients in two randomized, open-label phase III trials of crizotinib versus chemotherapy in ALK-positive advanced NSCLC in second-line (PROFILE 1007) and first-line settings (PROFILE 1014). Efficacy and safety were analyzed by race in the intention-to-treat and “as-treated” populations for efficacy and safety endpoints, respectively. Results In previously treated (n=157) and untreated (n=157) Asian patients, PFS was statistically significantly longer with crizotinib versus chemotherapy (hazard ratio for PFS, 0.526; 95% confidence interval, 0.363 to 0.762; p < 0.001 and hazard ratio, 0.442; 95% confidence interval, 0.302 to 0.648; p < 0.001, respectively). Similar antitumor activity was seen in the non-Asian and overall populations. ORRs were statistically significantly higher with crizotinib versus chemotherapy in both Asian and non-Asian previously treated and untreated patients (p < 0.05). The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (any grade)with crizotinib were vision disorder, diarrhea, and nausea, which were observed at a comparable incidence across Asian and non-Asian populations, irrespective of previous treatment status. Most adverse events were mild to moderate in severity. Conclusion These data, currently the only analysis showing Asian and non-Asian populations in the same study, support the efficacy and safety of crizotinib in Asian patients with previously treated or untreated ALK-positive advanced NSCLC.