Cilengitide combined with cetuximab and platinum-based chemotherapy as first-line treatment in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients: Results of an open-label, randomized, controlled phase II study (CERTO)

Background: This multicentre, open-label, randomized, controlled phase II study evaluated cilengitide in combination with cetuximab and platinum-based chemotherapy, compared with cetuximab and chemotherapy alone, as first-line treatment of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients and methods: Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to receive cetuximab plus platinum-based chemotherapy alone (control), or combined with cilengitide 2000 mg 1×/week i.v. (CIL-once) or 2×/week i.v. (CIL-twice). A protocol amendment limited enrolment to patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) histoscore ≥200 and closed the CIL-twice arm for practical feasibility issues. Primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS; independent read); secondary end points included overall survival (OS), safety, and biomarker analyses. A comparison between the CIL-once and control arms is reported, both for the total cohorts, as well as for patients with EGFR histoscore ≥200. Results: There were 85 patients in the CIL-once group and 84 in the control group. The PFS (independent read) was 6.2 versus 5.0 months for CIL-once versus control [hazard ratio (HR) 0.72; P = 0.085]; for patients with EGFR histoscore ≥200, PFS was 6.8 versus 5.6 months, respectively (HR 0.57; P = 0.0446). Median OS was 13.6 for CIL-once versus 9.7 months for control (HR 0.81; P = 0.265). In patients with EGFR ≥200, OS was 13.2 versus 11.8 months, respectively (HR 0.95; P = 0.855). No major differences in adverse events between CIL-once and control were reported; nausea (59% versus 56%, respectively) and neutropenia (54% versus 46%, respectively) were the most frequent. There was no increased incidence of thromboembolic events or haemorrhage in cilengitide-treated patients. αvβ3 and αvβ5 expression was neither a predictive nor a prognostic indicator. Conclusions: The addition of cilengitide to cetuximab/chemotherapy indicated potential clinical activity, with a trend for PFS difference in the independent-read analysis. However, the observed inconsistencies across end points suggest additional investigations are required to substantiate a potential role of other integrin inhibitors in NSCLC treatment.

Dacomitinib versus erlotinib in patients with EGFR-mutated advanced nonsmall-cell lung cancer (NSCLC): Pooled subset analyses from two randomized trials

Background: The irreversible epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors have demonstrated efficacy in NSCLC patients with activating EGFR mutations, but it is unknown if they are superior to the reversible inhibitors. Dacomitinib is an oral, small-molecule irreversible inhibitor of all enzymatically active HER family tyrosine kinases. Methods: The ARCHER 1009 (NCT01360554) and A7471028 (NCT00769067) studies randomized patients with locally advanced/metastatic NSCLC following progression with one or two prior chemotherapy regimens to dacomitinib or erlotinib. EGFR mutation testing was performed centrally on archived tumor samples. We pooled patients with exon 19 deletion and L858R EGFR mutations from both studies to compare the efficacy of dacomitinib to erlotinib. Results: One hundred twenty-one patients with any EGFR mutation were enrolled; 101 had activating mutations in exon 19 or 21. For patients with exon19/21 mutations, the median progression-free survival was 14.6 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 9.0–18.2] with dacomitinib and 9.6 months (95% CI 7.4–12.7) with erlotinib [unstratified hazard ratio (HR) 0.717 (95% CI 0.458–1.124), two-sided log-rank, P = 0.146]. The median survival was 26.6 months (95% CI 21.6–41.5) with dacomitinib versus 23.2 months (95% CI 16.0–31.8) with erlotinib [unstratified HR 0.737 (95% CI 0.431–1.259), two-sided log-rank, P = 0.265]. Dacomitinib was associated with a higher incidence of diarrhea and mucositis in both studies compared with erlotinib. Conclusions: Dacomitinib is an active agent with comparable efficacy to erlotinib in the EGFR mutated patients. The subgroup with exon 19 deletion had favorable outcomes with dacomitinib. An ongoing phase III study will compare dacomitinib to gefitinib in first-line therapy of patients with NSCLC harboring common activating EGFR mutations (ARCHER 1050; NCT01774721). Clinical trials number: ARCHER 1009 (NCT01360554) and A7471028 (NCT00769067).

Genetic Variants of the MDM2 Gene Are Predictive of Treatment-Related Toxicities and Overall Survival in Patients With Advanced NSCLC.

INTRODUCTION: Platinum agents can cause the formation of DNA adducts and induce apoptosis to eliminate tumor cells. The aim of the present study was to investigate the influence of genetic variants of MDM2 on chemotherapy-related toxicities and clinical outcomes in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We recruited 663 patients with advanced NSCLC who had been treated with first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. Five tagging single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in MDM2 were genotyped in these patients. The associations of these SNPs with clinical toxicities and outcomes were evaluated using logistic regression and Cox regression analyses. RESULTS: Two SNPs (rs1470383 and rs1690924) showed significant associations with chemotherapy-related toxicities (ie, overall, hematologic, and gastrointestinal toxicity). Compared with the wild genotype AA carriers, patients with the GG genotype of rs1470383 had an increased risk of overall toxicity (odds ratio [OR], 3.28; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.34-8.02; P = .009) and hematologic toxicity (OR, 4.10; 95% CI, 1.73-9.71; P = .001). Likewise, patients with the AG genotype of rs1690924 showed more sensitivity to gastrointestinal toxicity than did those with the wild-type homozygote GG (OR, 2.32; 95% CI, 1.30-4.14; P = .004). Stratified survival analysis revealed significant associations between rs1470383 genotypes and overall survival in patients without overall or hematologic toxicity (P = .007 and P = .0009, respectively). CONCLUSION: The results of our study suggest that SNPs in MDM2 might be used to predict the toxicities of platinum-based chemotherapy and overall survival in patients with advanced NSCLC. Additional validations of the association are warranted.

Targeted therapies in the treatment of advanced/metastatic NSCLC

The treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has evolved substantially during the last years. Chemotherapy remains the cornerstone of treatment and prolongs survival with a positive impact on quality of life. However, we seem to have reached a plateau of activity in the treatment of NSCLC. Recently, the addition of bevacizumab or cetuximab to chemotherapy doublets has improved the outcome in selected patients with advanced NSCLC. Furthermore, the use of erlotinib and gefitinib is an alternative for second line treatment. Advances in our understanding of molecular biology of cancer and mechanisms of tumourigenesis have further enabled the discovery of several potential molecular targets and development of novel 'targeted therapies'. The purpose of this study is to review current data on the role of targeted therapies in the treatment of advanced NSCLC. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Defining target volumes for stereotactic ablative radiotherapy of early-stage lung tumours: a comparison of three-dimensional 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and four-dimensional computed tomography.:PETCT versus 4DCT for SABR in Early Stage NSCLC

AIMS: High local control rates are achieved in stage I lung cancer using
stereotactic ablative radiotherapy. Target delineation is commonly based on
four-dimensional computed tomography (CT) scans. Target volumes defined by
positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) are compared with those defined by four-dimensional CT and conventional ('three-dimensional')
(18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose ((18)F-FDG) PET/CT.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: For 16 stage I non-small cell lung cancer tumours, six
approaches for deriving PET target volumes were evaluated: manual contouring,
standardised uptake value (SUV) absolute threshold of 2.5, 35% of maximum SUV
(35%SUV(MAX)), 41% of SUV(MAX) (41%SUV(MAX)) and two different source to
background ratio techniques (SBR-1 and SBR-2). PET-derived target volumes were compared with the internal target volume (ITV) from the modified maximum
intensity projection (MIP(MOD) ITV). Volumetric and positional correlation was
assessed using the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC).

RESULTS: PET-based target volumes did not correspond to four-dimensional CT-based target volumes. The mean DSC relative to MIP(MOD) ITV were: PET manual = 0.64, SUV2.5 = 0.64, 35%SUV(MAX) = 0.63, 41%SUV(MAX) = 0.57. SBR-1 = 0.52, SBR-2 =0.49. PET-based target volumes were smaller than corresponding MIP ITVs.

CONCLUSIONS: Conventional three-dimensional (18)F-FDG PET-derived target volumes for lung stereotactic ablative radiotherapy did not correspond well with those derived from four-dimensional CT, including those in routine clinical use
(MIP(MOD) ITV). Caution is required in using three-dimensional PET for motion
encompassing target volume delineation.

A comparison between accelerated hypofractionation and stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): Results of a propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) has become standard for inoperable early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, there is no randomized evidence demonstrating benefit over more fractionated radiotherapy. We compared accelerated hypofractionation (AH) and SABR using a propensity score-matched analysis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 1997-2007, 119 patients (T1-3N0M0 NSCLC) were treated with AH (48-60Gy, 12-15 fractions). Prior to SABR, this represented our institutional standard. From 2008-2012, 192 patients (T1-3N0M0 NSCLC) were treated with SABR (48-52Gy, 4-5 fractions). A total of 114 patients (57 per cohort) were matched (1:1 ratio, caliper: 0.10) using propensity scores.

RESULTS: Median follow-up (range) for the AH cohort was 36.3 (2.5-109.1) months, while that for the SABR group was 32.5 (0.3-62.6)months. Three-year overall survival (OS) and local control (LC) rates were 49.5% vs. 72.4% [p=0.024; hazard ratio (HR): 2.33 (1.28, 4.23), p=0.006] and 71.9% vs. 89.3% [p=0.077; HR: 5.56 (1.53, 20.2), p=0.009], respectively. On multivariable analysis, tumour diameter and PET staging were predictive for OS, while the only predictive factor for LC was treatment cohort.

CONCLUSIONS: OS and LC were improved with SABR, although OS is more closely related to non-treatment factors. This represents one of the few studies comparing AH to SABR for early-stage lung cancer.

Protocol for the isotoxic intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): a feasibility study.

Introduction The majority of stage III patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are unsuitable for concurrent chemoradiotherapy, the non-surgical gold standard of care. As the alternative treatment options of sequential chemoradiotherapy and radiotherapy alone are associated with high local failure rates, various intensification strategies have been employed. There is evidence to suggest that altered fractionation using hyperfractionation, acceleration, dose escalation, and individualisation may be of benefit. The MAASTRO group have pioneered the concept of ‘isotoxic’ radiotherapy allowing for individualised dose escalation using hyperfractionated accelerated radiotherapy based on predefined normal tissue constraints. This study aims to evaluate whether delivering isotoxic radiotherapy using intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) is achievable.

Methods and analysis Isotoxic IMRT is a multicentre feasibility study. From June 2014, a total of 35 patients from 7 UK centres, with a proven histological or cytological diagnosis of inoperable NSCLC, unsuitable for concurrent chemoradiotherapy will be recruited. A minimum of 2 cycles of induction chemotherapy is mandated before starting isotoxic radiotherapy. The dose of radiation will be increased until one or more of the organs at risk tolerance or the maximum dose of 79.2 Gy is reached. The primary end point is feasibility, with accrual rates, local control and overall survival our secondary end points. Patients will be followed up for 5 years.

Ethics and dissemination The study has received ethical approval (REC reference: 13/NW/0480) from the National Research Ethics Service (NRES) Committee North West—Greater Manchester South. The trial is conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and Good Clinical Practice (GCP). The trial results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented internationally.

Trial registration number NCT01836692; Pre-results.