Vichien Srimuninnimit

Efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant pertuzumab and trastuzumab in women with locally advanced, inflammatory, or early HER2-positive breast cancer (NeoSphere): a randomised multicentre, open-label, phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND Studies with pertuzumab, a novel anti-HER2 antibody, show improved efficacy when combined with the established HER2-directed antibody trastuzumab in breast cancer therapy. We investigated the combination of pertuzumab or trastuzumab, or both, with docetaxel and the combination of pertuzumab and trastuzumab without chemotherapy in the neoadjuvant setting. METHODS In this multicentre, open-label, phase 2 study, treatment-naive women with HER2-positive breast cancer were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) centrally and stratified by operable, locally advanced, and inflammatory breast cancer, and by hormone receptor expression to receive four neoadjuvant cycles of: trastuzumab (8 mg/kg loading dose, followed by 6 mg/kg every 3 weeks) plus docetaxel (75 mg/m(2), escalating, if tolerated, to 100 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks; group A) or pertuzumab (loading dose 840 mg, followed by 420 mg every 3 weeks) and trastuzumab plus docetaxel (group B) or pertuzumab and trastuzumab (group C) or pertuzumab plus docetaxel (group D). The primary endpoint, examined in the intention-to-treat population, was pathological complete response in the breast. Neither patients nor investigators were masked to treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00545688. FINDINGS Of 417 eligible patients, 107 were randomly assigned to group A, 107 to group B, 107 to group C, and 96 to group D. Patients given pertuzumab and trastuzumab plus docetaxel (group B) had a significantly improved pathological complete response rate (49 of 107 patients; 45·8% [95% CI 36·1-55·7]) compared with those given trastuzumab plus docetaxel (group A; 31 of 107; 29·0% [20·6-38·5]; p=0·0141). 23 of 96 (24·0% [15·8-33·7]) women given pertuzumab plus docetaxel (group D) had a pathological complete response, as did 18 of 107 (16·8% [10·3-25·3]) given pertuzumab and trastuzumab (group C). The most common adverse events of grade 3 or higher were neutropenia (61 of 107 women in group A, 48 of 107 in group B, one of 108 in group C, and 52 of 94 in group D), febrile neutropenia (eight, nine, none, and seven, respectively), and leucopenia (13, five, none, and seven, respectively). The number of serious adverse events was similar in groups A, B, and D (15-20 serious adverse events per group in 10-17% of patients) but lower in group C (four serious adverse events in 4% of patients). INTERPRETATION Patients given pertuzumab and trastuzumab plus docetaxel (group B) had a significantly improved pathological complete response rate compared with those given trastuzumab plus docetaxel, without substantial differences in tolerability. Pertuzumab and trastuzumab without chemotherapy eradicated tumours in a proportion of women and showed a favourable safety profile. These findings justify further exploration in adjuvant trials and support the neoadjuvant approach for accelerating drug assessment in early breast cancer. FUNDING F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Phase II Randomized Trial Comparing Sequential First-Line Everolimus and Second-Line Sunitinib Versus First-Line Sunitinib and Second-Line Everolimus in Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

PURPOSE A multicenter, randomized phase II trial, RECORD-3, was conducted to compare first-line everolimus followed by sunitinib at progression with the standard sequence of first-line sunitinib followed by everolimus in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS RECORD-3 used a crossover treatment design. The primary objective was to assess progression-free survival (PFS) noninferiority of first-line everolimus compared with first-line sunitinib. Secondary end points included combined PFS for each sequence, overall survival (OS), and safety. RESULTS Of 471 enrolled patients, 238 were randomly assigned to first-line everolimus followed by sunitinib, and 233 were randomly assigned to first-line sunitinib followed by everolimus. The primary end point was not met; the median PFS was 7.9 months for first-line everolimus and 10.7 months for first-line sunitinib (hazard ratio [HR], 1.4; 95% CI, 1.2 to 1.8). Among patients who discontinued first-line, 108 (45%) crossed over from everolimus to second-line sunitinib, and 99 (43%) crossed over from sunitinib to second-line everolimus. The median combined PFS was 21.1 months for sequential everolimus then sunitinib and was 25.8 months for sequential sunitinib then everolimus (HR, 1.3; 95% CI, 0.9 to 1.7). The median OS was 22.4 months for sequential everolimus and then sunitinib and 32.0 months for sequential sunitinib and then everolimus (HR, 1.2; 95% CI, 0.9 to 1.6). Common treatment-emergent adverse events during first-line everolimus or sunitinib were stomatitis (53% and 57%, respectively), fatigue (45% and 51%, respectively), and diarrhea (38% and 57%, respectively). CONCLUSION Everolimus did not demonstrate noninferiority compared with sunitinib as a first-line therapy. The trial results support the standard treatment paradigm of first-line sunitinib followed by everolimus at progression.

Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Phase II Study of Sequential Erlotinib and Chemotherapy As First-Line Treatment for Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

PURPOSE This study investigated whether sequential administration of erlotinib and chemotherapy improves clinical outcomes versus chemotherapy alone in unselected, chemotherapy-naïve patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS Previously untreated patients (n = 154) with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 were randomly assigned to receive erlotinib (150 mg/d) or placebo on days 15 to 28 of a 4-week cycle that included gemcitabine (1,250 mg/m(2) days 1 and 8) and either cisplatin (75 mg/m(2) day 1) or carboplatin (5 x area under the serum concentration-time curve, day 1). The primary end point was nonprogression rate (NPR) at 8 weeks. Secondary end points included tumor response rate, NPR at 16 weeks, duration of response, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. RESULTS The NPR at 8 weeks was 80.3% in the gemcitabine plus cisplatin or carboplatin (GC)-erlotinib arm (n = 76) and 76.9% in the GC-placebo arm (n = 78). At 16 weeks, the NPR was 64.5% for GC-erlotinib versus 53.8% for GC-placebo. The response rate was 35.5% for GC-erlotinib versus 24.4% for GC-placebo. PFS was significantly longer with GC-erlotinib than with GC-placebo (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.47; log-rank P = .0002; median, 29.4 v 23.4 weeks); this benefit was consistent across all clinical subgroups. There was no significant difference in OS. The addition of erlotinib to chemotherapy was well tolerated, with no increase in hematologic toxicity, and no treatment-related interstitial lung disease. CONCLUSION Sequential administration of erlotinib following gemcitabine/platinum chemotherapy led to a significant improvement in PFS. This treatment approach warrants further investigation in a phase III study.

Intercalated combination of chemotherapy and erlotinib for patients with advanced stage non-small-cell lung cancer (FASTACT-2): a randomised, double-blind trial

BACKGROUND The results of FASTACT, a randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 2 study, showed that intercalated chemotherapy and erlotinib significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. We undertook FASTACT-2, a phase 3 study in a similar patient population. METHODS In this phase 3 trial, patients with untreated stage IIIB/IV non-small-cell lung cancer were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio by use of an interactive internet response system with minimisation algorithm (stratified by disease stage, tumour histology, smoking status, and chemotherapy regimen) to receive six cycles of gemcitabine (1250 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8, intravenously) plus platinum (carboplatin 5 × area under the curve or cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) on day 1, intravenously) with intercalated erlotinib (150 mg/day on days 15-28, orally; chemotherapy plus erlotinib) or placebo orally (chemotherapy plus placebo) every 4 weeks. With the exception of an independent group responsible for monitoring data and safety monitoring board, everyone outside the interactive internet response system company was masked to treatment allocation. Patients continued to receive erlotinib or placebo until progression or unacceptable toxicity or death, and all patients in the placebo group were offered second-line erlotinib at the time of progression. The primary endpoint was PFS in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00883779. FINDINGS From April 29, 2009, to Sept 9, 2010, 451 patients were randomly assigned to chemotherapy plus erlotinib (n=226) or chemotherapy plus placebo (n=225). PFS was significantly prolonged with chemotherapy plus erlotinib versus chemotherapy plus placebo (median PFS 7·6 months [95% CI 7·2-8·3], vs 6·0 months [5·6-7·1], hazard ratio [HR] 0·57 [0·47-0·69]; p<0·0001). Median overall survival for patients in the chemotherapy plus erlotinib and chemotherapy plus placebo groups was 18·3 months (16·3-20·8) and 15·2 months (12·7-17·5), respectively (HR 0·79 [0·64-0·99]; p=0·0420). Treatment benefit was noted only in patients with an activating EGFR gene mutation (median PFS 16·8 months [12·9-20·4] vs 6·9 months [5·3-7·6], HR 0·25 [0·16-0·39]; p<0·0001; median overall survival 31·4 months [22·2-undefined], vs 20·6 months [14·2-26·9], HR 0·48 [0·27-0·84]; p=0·0092). Serious adverse events were reported by 76 (34%) of 222 patients in the chemotherapy plus placebo group and 69 (31%) of 226 in the chemotherapy plus erlotinib group. The most common grade 3 or greater adverse events were neutropenia (65 [29%] patients and 55 [25%], respectively), thrombocytopenia (32 [14%] and 31 [14%], respectively), and anaemia (26 [12%] and 21 [9%], respectively). INTERPRETATION Intercalated chemotherapy and erlotinib is a viable first-line option for patients with non-small-cell lung cancer with EGFR mutation-positive disease or selected patients with unknown EGFR mutation status. FUNDING F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Estimating the magnitude of trastuzumab effects within patient subgroups in the HERA trial

BACKGROUND Trastuzumab (Herceptin(R)) improves disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival for patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive early breast cancer. We aimed to assess the magnitude of its clinical benefit for subpopulations defined by nodal and steroid hormone receptor status using data from the Herceptin Adjuvant (HERA) study. PATIENTS AND METHODS HERA is an international multicenter randomized trial comparing 1 or 2 years of trastuzumab treatment with observation after standard chemotherapy in women with HER2-positive breast cancer. In total, 1703 women randomized to 1-year trastuzumab and 1698 women randomized to observation were included in these analyses. Median follow-up was 23.5 months. The primary endpoint was DFS. RESULTS The overall hazard ratio (HR) for trastuzumab versus observation was 0.64 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.54-0.76; P < 0.0001], ranging from 0.46 to 0.82 for subgroups. Estimated improvement in 3-year DFS in subgroups ranged from +11.3% to +0.6%. Patients with the best prognosis (those with node-negative disease and tumors 1.1-2.0 cm) had benefit similar to the overall cohort (HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.26-1.07; 3-year DFS improvement +4.6%, 95% CI -4.0% to 13.2%). CONCLUSIONS Adjuvant trastuzumab therapy reduces the risk of relapse similarly across subgroups defined by nodal status and steroid hormone receptor status, even those at relatively low risk for relapse.

Detection and Dynamic Changes of EGFR Mutations from Circulating Tumor DNA as a Predictor of Survival Outcomes in NSCLC Patients Treated with First-line Intercalated Erlotinib and Chemotherapy

Purpose: Blood-based circulating-free (cf) tumor DNA may be an alternative to tissue-based EGFR mutation testing in NSCLC. This exploratory analysis compares matched tumor and blood samples from the FASTACT-2 study. Experimental Design: Patients were randomized to receive six cycles of gemcitabine/platinum plus sequential erlotinib or placebo. EGFR mutation testing was performed using the cobas tissue test and the cobas blood test (in development). Blood samples at baseline, cycle 3, and progression were assessed for blood test detection rate, sensitivity, and specificity; concordance with matched tumor analysis (n = 238), and correlation with progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Results: Concordance between tissue and blood tests was 88%, with blood test sensitivity of 75% and a specificity of 96%. Median PFS was 13.1 versus 6.0 months for erlotinib and placebo, respectively, for those with baseline EGFR mut+ cfDNA [HR, 0.22; 95% confidence intervals (CI), 0.14–0.33, P < 0.0001] and 6.2 versus 6.1 months, respectively, for the EGFR mut− cfDNA subgroup (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.65–1.04, P = 0.1076). For patients with EGFR mut+ cfDNA at baseline, median PFS was 7.2 versus 12.0 months for cycle 3 EGFR mut+ cfDNA versus cycle 3 EGFR mut− patients, respectively (HR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.21–0.48, P < 0.0001); median OS by cycle 3 status was 18.2 and 31.9 months, respectively (HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.31–0.84, P = 0.0066). Conclusions: Blood-based EGFR mutation analysis is relatively sensitive and highly specific. Dynamic changes in cfDNA EGFR mutation status relative to baseline may predict clinical outcomes. Clin Cancer Res; 21(14); 3196–203. ©2015 AACR.

5-year analysis of neoadjuvant pertuzumab and trastuzumab in patients with locally advanced, inflammatory, or early-stage HER2-positive breast cancer (NeoSphere): a multicentre, open-label, phase 2 randomised trial

BACKGROUND In the primary analysis of the NeoSphere trial, patients given neoadjuvant pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and docetaxel showed a significantly improved pathological complete response compared with those given trastuzumab and docetaxel after surgery. Here, we report 5-year progression-free survival, disease-free survival, and safety. METHODS In this multicentre, open-label, phase 2 randomised trial in hospitals and medical clinics, treatment-naive adults with locally advanced, inflammatory, or early-stage HER2-positive breast cancer were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) to receive four neoadjuvant cycles of trastuzumab (8 mg/kg loading dose, followed by 6 mg/kg every 3 weeks) plus docetaxel (75 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks, increasing to 100 mg/m(2) from cycle 2 if tolerated; group A), pertuzumab (840 mg loading dose, followed by 420 mg every 3 weeks) and trastuzumab plus docetaxel (group B), pertuzumab and trastuzumab (group C), or pertuzumab and docetaxel (group D). After surgery, patients received three cycles of FEC (fluorouracil 600 mg/m(2), epirubicin 90 mg/m(2), and cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m(2)) every 3 weeks (patients in group C received four cycles of docetaxel prior to FEC), and trastuzumab 6 mg/kg every 3 weeks to complete 1 years treatment (17 cycles in total). Randomisation was done by a central centre using dynamic allocation, stratified by operable, locally advanced, and inflammatory breast cancer, and by oestrogen and/or progesterone receptor positivity. Safety analyses were done according to treatment received. The primary endpoint (pathological complete response) was previously reported; secondary endpoints reported here are 5-year progression-free survival (analysed in the intention-to-treat population) and disease-free survival (analysed in patients who had surgery). Secondary and exploratory analyses were not powered for formal statistical hypothesis testing, and therefore results are for descriptive purposes only. The study ended on Sept 22, 2014 (last patient, last visit). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00545688. FINDINGS Between Dec 17, 2007, and Dec 22, 2009, 417 eligible patients were randomly assigned to group A (107 patients), group B (107 patients), group C (107 patients), or group D (96 patients). One patient in group A withdrew before treatment. One patient assigned to group D received group A treatment, one patient assigned to group D received group B treatment, and one patient assigned to group B received group C treatment. At clinical cutoff, 87 patients had progressed or died. 5-year progression-free survival rates were 81% (95% CI 71-87) for group A, 86% (77-91) for group B, 73% (64-81) for group C, and 73% (63-81) for group D (hazard ratios 0·69 [95% CI 0·34-1·40] group B vs group A, 1·25 [0·68-2·30] group C vs group A, and 2·05 [1·07-3·93] group D vs group B). Disease-free survival results were consistent with progression-free survival results and were 81% (95% CI 72-88) for group A, 84% (72-91) for group B, 80% (70-86) for group C, and 75% (64-83) for group D. Patients who achieved total pathological complete response (all groups combined) had longer progression-free survival compared with patients who did not (85% [76-91] in patients who achieved total pathological response vs 76% [71-81] in patients who did not achieve total pathological response; hazard ratio 0·54 [95% CI 0·29-1·00]). There were no new or long-term safety concerns and tolerability was similar across groups (neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatment periods combined). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were neutropenia (group A: 71 [66%] of 107 patients; group B: 59 [55%] of 107; group C: 40 [37%] of 108; group D: 60 [64%] of 94), febrile neutropenia (group A: 10 [9%]; group B: 12 [11%]; group C: 5 [5%]; group D: 15 [16%]), and leucopenia (group A: 13 [12%]; group B: 6 [6%]; group C: 4 [4%]; group D: 8 [9%]). The number of patients with one or more serious adverse event was similar across groups (19-22 serious adverse events per group in 18-22% of patients). INTERPRETATION Progression-free survival and disease-free survival at 5-year follow-up show large and overlapping CIs, but support the primary endpoint (pathological complete response) and suggest that neoadjuvant pertuzumab is beneficial when combined with trastuzumab and docetaxel. Additionally, they suggest that total pathological complete response could be an early indicator of long-term outcome in early-stage HER2-positive breast cancer. FUNDING F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Incidence and time course of everolimus-related adverse events in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer: insights from BOLERO-2

BACKGROUND In the BOLERO-2 trial, everolimus (EVE), an inhibitor of mammalian target of rapamycin, demonstrated significant clinical benefit with an acceptable safety profile when administered with exemestane (EXE) in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive (HR+) advanced breast cancer. We report on the incidence, time course, severity, and resolution of treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) as well as incidence of dose modifications during the extended follow-up of this study. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients were randomized (2:1) to receive EVE 10 mg/day or placebo (PBO), with open-label EXE 25 mg/day (n = 724). The primary end point was progression-free survival. Secondary end points included overall survival, objective response rate, and safety. Safety evaluations included recording of AEs, laboratory values, dose interruptions/adjustments, and study drug discontinuations. RESULTS The safety population comprised 720 patients (EVE + EXE, 482; PBO + EXE, 238). The median follow-up was 18 months. Class-effect toxicities, including stomatitis, pneumonitis, and hyperglycemia, were generally of mild or moderate severity and occurred relatively early after treatment initiation (except pneumonitis); incidence tapered off thereafter. EVE dose reduction and interruption (360 and 705 events, respectively) required for AE management were independent of patient age. The median duration of dose interruption was 7 days. Discontinuation of both study drugs because of AEs was higher with EVE + EXE (9%) versus PBO + EXE (3%). CONCLUSIONS Most EVE-associated AEs occur soon after initiation of therapy, are typically of mild or moderate severity, and are generally manageable with dose reduction and interruption. Discontinuation due to toxicity was uncommon. Understanding the time course of class-effect AEs will help inform preventive and monitoring strategies as well as patient education. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER NCT00863655.The BOLERO-2 trial demonstrated that adding everolimus to exemestane substantially improved clinical benefit with acceptable safety in postmenopausal women with HR+ breast cancer relapsing/progressing on a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor. Incidences and severities of everolimus-related toxicity were consistent with other oncology settings, and were manageable using established strategies.

Nilotinib versus imatinib as first-line therapy for patients with unresectable or metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumours (ENESTg1): a randomised phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND Nilotinib inhibits the tyrosine kinase activity of ABL1/BCR-ABL1 and KIT, platelet-derived growth factor receptors (PDGFRs), and the discoidin domain receptor. Gain-of-function mutations in KIT or PDGFRα are key drivers in most gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GISTs). This trial was designed to test the efficacy and safety of nilotinib versus imatinib as first-line therapy for patients with advanced GISTs. METHODS In this randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 3 trial (ENESTg1), participants from academic centres were aged 18 years or older and had previously untreated, histologically confirmed, metastatic or unresectable GISTs. Patients were stratified by previous adjuvant therapy and randomly assigned (1:1) via a randomisation list to receive oral imatinib 400 mg once daily or oral nilotinib 400 mg twice daily. The primary endpoint was centrally reviewed progression-free survival. Efficacy endpoints were assessed by intention-to-treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00785785. FINDINGS Because the futility boundary was crossed at a preplanned interim analysis, trial accrual terminated in April, 2011. Between March 16, 2009, and April 21, 2011, 647 patients were enrolled; of whom 324 were allocated nilotinib and 320 were allocated imatinib. At final analysis of the core study (data cutoff, October, 2012), 2-year progression-free survival was higher in the imatinib group (59·2% [95% CI 50·9-66·5]) than in the nilotinib group (51·6% [43·0-59·5]; hazard ratio 1·47 [95% CI 1·10-1·95]). In the imatinib group, the most common grade 3-4 adverse events were hypophosphataemia (19 [6%]), anaemia (17 [5%]), abdominal pain (13; 4%), and elevated lipase level (15; 5%), and in the nilotinib group were anaemia (18; 6%), elevated lipase level (15; 5%), elevated alanine aminotransferase concentration (12; 4%), and abdominal pain (11; 3%). The most common serious adverse event in both groups was abdominal pain (11 [4%] in the imatinib group, 14 [4%] in the nilotinib group). INTERPRETATION Nilotinib cannot be recommended for broad use to treat first-line GIST. However, future studies might identify patient subsets for whom first-line nilotinib could be of clinical benefit. FUNDING Novartis Pharmaceuticals.

Phase II trial of paclitaxel, carboplatin, and concurrent radiation therapy for locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

We conducted a phase II trial to investigate the efficacy of concurrent chemoradiation in patients with stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Thirty patients with inoperable NSCLC were enrolled onto a multicenter phase II trial of concurrent chemoradiation therapy. Patients received six weekly cycles of paclitaxel 45 mg/m(2) over 1 h; carboplatin at (area under the curve) AUC 2; and radiation therapy of 60 Gy. Radiation was administered to the primary tumor and regional lymph nodes (40 Gy over 4 weeks) followed by a boost to the primary tumor (20 Gy in 2 weeks). After the initial phase of concurrent chemoradiation, patients received an additional four cycles of paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) over 3 h and carboplatin at AUC 6 every 3 weeks. The overall objective response rate of 30 assessable patients was 76.7%. At the median follow-up time of 13.1 months, the median survival time was 14.5 months (95% CI, 10.59-18.48). The median progression-free survival was 10.5 months (95% CI, 7.72-13.28). The major toxicity was hematologic. The incidence of grade 3 esophagitis was 10%. In conclusion, this chemoradiation regimen is well tolerated and shows significant clinical results for locally advanced NSCLC. Locoregional failure rate remains an important issue with this newer chemotherapeutic regimen. A novel chemotherapy and radiation therapy is clearly needed.