First-Line afatinib versus chemotherapy in patients with non–small cell lung cancer and common epidermal growth factor receptor gene mutations and brain metastases

Introduction Metastatic spread to the brain is common in patients with non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but these patients are generally excluded from prospective clinical trials. The studies, phase III study of afatinib or cisplatin plus pemetrexed in patients with metastatic lung adenocarcinoma with EGFR mutations (LUX-Lung 3) and a randomized, open-label, phase III study of BIBW 2992 versus chemotherapy as first-line treatment for patients with stage IIIB or IV adenocarcinoma of the lung harbouring an EGFR activating mutation (LUX-Lung 6) investigated first-line afatinib versus platinum-based chemotherapy in epidermal growth factor receptor gene (EGFR) mutation-positive patients with NSCLC and included patients with brain metastases; prespecified subgroup analyses are assessed in this article. Methods For both LUX-Lung 3 and LUX-Lung 6, prespecified subgroup analyses of progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival, and objective response rate were undertaken in patients with asymptomatic brain metastases at baseline (n = 35 and n = 46, respectively). Post hoc analyses of clinical outcomes was undertaken in the combined data set (n = 81). Results In both studies, there was a trend toward improved PFS with afatinib versus chemotherapy in patients with brain metastases (LUX-Lung 3: 11.1 versus 5.4 months, hazard ratio [HR] = 0.54, p = 0.1378; LUX-Lung 6: 8.2 versus 4.7 months, HR = 0.47, p = 0.1060). The magnitude of PFS improvement with afatinib was similar to that observed in patients without brain metastases. In combined analysis, PFS was significantly improved with afatinib versus with chemotherapy in patients with brain metastases (8.2 versus 5.4 months; HR, 0.50; p = 0.0297). Afatinib significantly improved the objective response rate versus chemotherapy in patients with brain metastases. Safety findings were consistent with previous reports. Conclusions These findings lend support to the clinical activity of afatinib in EGFR mutation–positive patients with NSCLC and asymptomatic brain metastases.

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.

Paclitaxel versus doxorubicin as first-line single-agent chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer: a European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Randomized Study with cross-over.

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of paclitaxel versus doxorubicin given as single agents in first-line therapy of advanced breast cancer (primary end point, progression-free survival ¿PFS) and to explore the degree of cross-resistance between the two agents. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Three hundred thirty-one patients were randomized to receive either paclitaxel 200 mg/m(2), 3-hour infusion every 3 weeks, or doxorubicin 75 mg/m(2), intravenous bolus every 3 weeks. Seven courses were planned unless progression or unacceptable toxicity occurred before the seven courses were finished. Patients who progressed within the seven courses underwent early cross-over to the alternative drug, while a delayed cross-over was optional for the remainder of patients at the time of disease progression. RESULTS: Objective response in first-line therapy was significantly better (P =.003) for doxorubicin (response rate ¿RR, 41%) than for paclitaxel (RR, 25%), with doxorubicin achieving a longer median PFS (7.5 months for doxorubicin v 3.9 months for paclitaxel, P <.001). In second-line therapy, cross-over to doxorubicin (91 patients) and to paclitaxel (77 patients) gave response rates of 30% and 16%, respectively. The median survival durations of 18.3 months for doxorubicin and 15.6 months for paclitaxel were not significantly different (P =.38). The doxorubicin arm had greater toxicity, but this was counterbalanced by better symptom control. CONCLUSION: At the dosages and schedules used in the present study, doxorubicin achieves better disease and symptom control than paclitaxel in first-line treatment. Doxorubicin and paclitaxel are not totally cross-resistant, which supports further investigation of these drugs in combination or in sequence, both in advanced disease and in the adjuvant setting.

Doxorubicin and paclitaxel versus doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide as first-line chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer: The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer 10961 Multicenter Phase III Trial.

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and tolerability of the combination of doxorubicin and paclitaxel (AT) with a standard doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC) regimen as first-line chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients were anthracycline-naive and had bidimensionally measurable metastatic breast cancer. Two hundred seventy-five patients were randomly assigned to be treated with AT (doxorubicin 60 mg/m(2) as an intravenous bolus plus paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) as a 3-hour infusion) or AC (doxorubicin 60 mg/m(2) plus cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m(2)) every 3 weeks for a maximum of six cycles. A paclitaxel (200 mg/m(2)) and cyclophosphamide (750 mg/m(2)) dose escalation was planned at cycle 2 if no grade >or= 3 neutropenia occurred in cycle 1. The primary efficacy end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points were response rate (RR), safety, overall survival (OS), and quality of life. RESULTS: A median number of six cycles were delivered in the two treatment arms. The relative dose-intensity and delivered cumulative dose of doxorubicin were lower in the AT arm. Dose escalation was only possible in 17% and 20% of the AT and AC patients, respectively. Median PFS was 6 months in the two treatments arms. RR was 58% versus 54%, and median OS was 20.6 versus 20.5 months in the AT and AC arms, respectively. The AT regimen was characterized by a higher incidence of febrile neutropenia, 32% versus 9% in the AC arm. CONCLUSION: No differences in the efficacy study end points were observed between the two treatment arms. Treatment-related toxicity compromised doxorubicin-delivered dose-intensity in the paclitaxel-based regimen

Taxanes alone or in combination with anthracyclines as first-line therapy of patients with metastatic breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Taxanes (paclitaxel or docetaxel) have been sequenced or combined with anthracyclines (doxorubicin or epirubicin) for the first-line treatment of advanced breast cancer. This meta-analysis uses data from all relevant trials to detect any advantages of taxanes in terms of tumor response, progression-free survival (PFS), and survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Individual patient data were collected on eight randomized combination trials comparing anthracyclines + taxanes (+ cyclophosphamide in one trial) with anthracyclines + cyclophosphamide (+ fluorouracil in four trials), and on three single-agent trials comparing taxanes with anthracyclines. Combination trials included 3,034 patients; single-agent trials included 919 patients. RESULTS: Median follow-up of living patients was 43 months, median survival was 19.3 months, and median PFS was 7.1 months. In single-agent trials, response rates were similar in the taxanes (38%) and in the anthracyclines (33%) arms (P = .08). The hazard ratios for taxanes compared with anthracyclines were 1.19 (95% CI, 1.04 to 1.36; P = .011) for PFS and 1.01 (95% CI, 0.88 to 1.16; P = .90) for survival. In combination trials, response rates were 57% (10% complete) in taxane-based combinations and 46% (6% complete) in control arms (P < .001). The hazard ratios for taxane-based combinations compared with control arms were 0.92 (95% CI, 0.85 to 0.99; P = .031) for PFS and 0.95 (95% CI, 0.88 to 1.03; P = .24) for survival. CONCLUSION: Taxanes were significantly worse than single-agent anthracyclines in terms of PFS, but not in terms of response rates or survival. Taxane-based combinations were significantly better than anthracycline-based combinations in terms of response rates and PFS, but not in terms of survival.

Efficacy of Pharmacokinetics-Directed Busulfan, Cyclophosphamide, and Etoposide Conditioning and Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation for Lymphoma: Comparison of a Multicenter Phase II Study and CIBMTR Outcomes.

Busulfan, cyclophosphamide, and etoposide (BuCyE) is a commonly used conditioning regimen for autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). This multicenter, phase II study examined the safety and efficacy of BuCyE with individually adjusted busulfan based on preconditioning pharmacokinetics. The study initially enrolled Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) patients ages 18 to 80 years but was amended due to high early treatment-related mortality (TRM) in patients > 65 years. BuCyE outcomes were compared with contemporaneous recipients of carmustine, etoposide, cytarabine, and melphalan (BEAM) from the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research. Two hundred seven subjects with HL (n = 66) or NHL (n = 141) were enrolled from 32 centers in North America, and 203 underwent ASCT. Day 100 TRM for all subjects (n = 203), patients > 65 years (n = 17), and patients ≤ 65 years (n = 186) were 4.5%, 23.5%, and 2.7%, respectively. The estimated rates of 2-year progression-free survival (PFS) were 33% for HL and 58%, 77%, and 43% for diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL; n = 63), mantle cell lymphoma (MCL; n = 29), and follicular lymphoma (FL; n = 23), respectively. The estimated rates of 2-year overall survival (OS) were 76% for HL and 65%, 89%, and 89% for DLBCL, MCL, and FL, respectively. In the matched analysis rates of 2-year TRM were 3.3% for BuCyE and 3.9% for BEAM, and there were no differences in outcomes for NHL. Patients with HL had lower rates of 2-year PFS with BuCyE, 33% (95% CI, 21% to 46%), than with BEAM, 59% (95% CI, 52% to 66%), with no differences in TRM or OS. BuCyE provided adequate disease control and safety in B cell NHL patients ≤ 65 years but produced worse PFS in HL patients when compared with BEAM.

Mitotic Arrest Deficiency Protein 2 (MAD2) and Histone Deacetylase 6 (HDAC6) Present a Complex Relationship in Their Regulation and Expression and Subsequent Impact on Chemoresponsiveness

Introduction:
Ovarian cancer patients presenting with advanced stage (III/IV)
canceraretreatedwithcarboplatinumincombinationwithpaclitaxel.Despitea
significant initial response rate, fewer than 20% of patients become long-term
survivors. We have published that low MAD2 expression levels associate with
reduced progression free survival (PFS) in patients with high-grade serous
epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). Moreover, we have demonstrated that MAD2
expressionisdown-regulatedbythemicroRNAmiR-433(
Furlong et al., 2011
).
Interestingly, miR-433 also down-regulates HDAC6 (
Simon et al., 2010
), which
uniquely deacetylates
a
-tubulin prior to HDAC6s binding to
b
-tubulin.
In vitro
studies have shown that HDAC6 inhibition in combination with paclitaxel
treatment enhances chemoresistant cancer cell death. To date, an interaction
between MAD2 and HDAC6 has not been reported.
Experimental design:
MAD2 and HDAC6 immunohistochemistry (IHC) and
Western blot analyses were performed to investigate the role of HDAC6 and
MAD2 in chemoresistance to paclitaxel in high-grade serous EOC.
Results and Discussion:
In vitro
experiments demonstrated that overex-
pression of pre-miR-433, which targets MAD2, resulted in down-regulation
of HDAC6 in EOC cell lines. High levels of HDAC6 are co-expressed with
MAD2 in the paclitaxel resistant UPN251 and OVCAR7 cell lines. While, all
4 paclitaxel resistant EOC cell lines express higher levels of miR-433 than
the paclitaxel sensitive A2780 cells, only ovca432 and ovca433 demonstrated
down-regulation of both HDAC6 and MAD2. Paclitaxel binds to
b
-tubulin and
causesmicrotubulepolymerizationinpaclitaxelsensitivecellsasdemonstrated
by tubulin acetylation in A2780 cells. However, paclitaxel failed to cause a
significant acetylation of
a
-tubulin and microtubule stabilisation in the resistant
UPN251 cells. Therefore resistance in this cell line may be mediated by
aberrantly high HDAC6 activity. We have previously shown that MAD2 knock-
down cells are resistant to paclitaxel (
Furlong F., et al., 2011; Prencipe M.,
et al., 2009
). We measured HDAC6 protein expression in MAD2 knockdown
cells and showed that MAD2 knockdown is associated with concomitant
up-regulation of HDAC6. We hypothesise that the up-regulation of HDAC6
by MAD2 knockdown renders cancer cells more resistant to paclitaxel and
increases the invasive potential of these cells. On-going experiments will test
this hypothesis. Lastly we have observed differential MAD2 and HDAC6 IHC
staining intensity in formalin fixed paraffin embedded EOC samples.
In conclusion
, we have reported on a novel interaction between MAD2 and
HDAC6 which may have important consequences for paclitaxel resistant EOC.
Moreover, understanding chemo-responsiveness in ovarian tumours will lead
to improved patient management and treatment options for women diagnosed
with this disease

Pharmacogenetic angiogenesis profiling for first-line Bevacizumab plus oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer

PURPOSE: There is substantial germline genetic variability within angiogenesis pathway genes, thereby causing interindividual differences in angiogenic capacity and resistance to antiangiogenesis therapy. We investigated germline polymorphisms in genes involved in VEGF-dependent and -independent angiogenesis pathways to predict clinical outcome and tumor response in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients treated with bevacizumab and oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: A total of 132 patients treated with first-line bevacizumab and FOLFOX or XELOX were included in this study. Genomic DNA was isolated from whole-blood samples by PCR-RFLP or direct DNA sequencing. The endpoints of the study were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and response rate (RR).

RESULTS: The minor alleles of EGF rs444903 A>G and IGF-1 rs6220 A>G were associated with increased OS and remained significant in multivariate Cox regression analysis (HR: 0.52; 95% CI: 0.31-0.87; adjusted P = 0.012 and HR: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.36-0.99; adjusted P = 0.046, respectively). The minor allele of HIF1α rs11549465 C>T was significantly associated with increased PFS but lost its significance in multivariate analysis. CXCR1 rs2234671 G>C, CXCR2 rs2230054 T>C, EGFR rs2227983 G>A, and VEGFR-2 rs2305948 C>T predicted tumor response, with CXCR1 rs2234671 G>C remaining significant in multiple testing (P(act) = 0.003).

CONCLUSION: In this study, we identified common germline variants in VEGF-dependent and -independent angiogenesis genes predicting clinical outcome and tumor response in patients with mCRC receiving first-line bevacizumab and oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy.

Y-90-Ibritumomab Tiuxetan (Zevalin (R)) Consolidation of First Remission In Advanced-Stage Follicular Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma: Updated Results After a Median Follow-up of 66.2 Months From the International, Randomized, Phase III First-Line Indolent Trial (FIT) In 414 Patients

The FIT trial was conducted to evaluate the safety and efficacy of 90Y-ibritumomab tiuxetan (0.4 mCi/kg; maximum dose 32 mCi) when used as consolidation of first complete or partial remission in patients with previously untreated, advanced-stage follicular lymphoma (FL). Patients were randomly assigned to either 90Y-ibritumomab treatment (n = 207) or observation (n = 202) within 3 months (mo) of completing initial induction therapy (chemotherapy only: 86%; rituximab in combination with chemotherapy: 14%). Response status prior to randomization did not differ between the groups: 52% complete response (CR)/CR unconfirmed (CRu) to induction therapy and 48% partial response (PR) in the 90Y-ibritumomab arm vs 53% CR/CRu and 44% PR in the control arm. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) of the intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Results from the first extended follow-up after a median of 3.5 years revealed a significant improvement in PFS from the time of randomization with 90Y-ibritumomab consolidation compared with control (36.5 vs 13.3 mo, respectively; P < 0.0001; Morschhauser et al. JCO. 2008; 26:5156-5164). Here we report a median follow-up of 66.2 mo (5.5 years). Five-year PFS was 47% in the 90Y-ibritumomab group and 29% in the control group (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.51, 95% CI 0.39-0.65; P < 0.0001). Median PFS in the 90Y-ibritumomab group was 49 mo vs 14 mo in the control group. In patients achieving a CR/CRu after induction, 5-year PFS was 57% in the 90Y-ibritumomab group, and the median had not yet been reached at 92 months, compared with a 43% 5-year PFS in the control group and a median of 31 mo (HR = 0.61, 95% CI 0.42-0.89). For patients in PR after induction, the 5-year PFS was 38% in the 90Y-ibritumomab group with a median PFS of 30 mo vs 14% in the control group with a median PFS of 6 mo (HR = 0.38, 95% CI 0.27-0.53). Patients who had received rituximab as part of induction treatment had a 5-year PFS of 64% in the 90Y-ibritumomab group and 48% in the control group (HR = 0.66, 95% CI 0.30-1.47). For all patients, time to next treatment (as calculated from the date of randomization) differed significantly between both groups; median not reached at 99 mo in the 90Y-ibritumomab group vs 35 mo in the control group (P < 0.0001). The majority of patients received rituximab-containing regimens when treated after progression (63/82 [77%] in the 90Y-ibritumomab group and 102/122 [84%] in the control group). Overall response rate to second-line treatment was 79% in the 90Y-ibritumomab group (57% CR/CRu and 22% PR) vs 78% in the control arm (59% CR/CRu, 19% PR). Five-year overall survival was not significantly different between the groups; 93% and 89% in the 90Y-ibritumomab and control groups, respectively (P = 0.561). To date, 40 patients have died; 18 in the 90Y-ibritumomab group and 22 in the control group. Secondary malignancies were diagnosed in 16 patients in the 90Y-ibritumomab arm vs 9 patients in the control arm (P = 0.19). There were 6 (3%) cases of myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS)/acute myelogenous leukemia (AML) in the 90Y-ibritumomab arm vs 1 MDS in the control arm (P = 0.063). In conclusion, this extended follow-up of the FIT trial confirms the benefit of 90Y-ibritumomab consolidation with a nearly 3 year advantage in median PFS. A significant 5-year PFS improvement was confirmed for patients with a CR/CRu or a PR after induction. Effective rescue treatment with rituximab-containing regimens may explain the observed no difference in overall survival between both patient groups who were - for the greater part - rituximab-naïve.

Epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitors in advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the lung: a meta-analysis.

Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) targeting the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) are well established in treating metastatic pulmonary adenocarcinoma, especially patients with activating EGFR mutations. EGFR mutations are rare in pulmonary squamous cell carcinomas (SCCs). There are conflicting data supporting the efficacy of EGFR-TKIs in advanced lung SCC. We analyzed the impact of EGFR-TKIs on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in unselected patients with lung SCC.

Sorafenib in Combination With Capecitabine: An Oral Regimen for Patients With HER2-Negative Locally Advanced or Metastatic Breast Cancer

Purpose Sorafenib is a multikinase inhibitor with antiangiogenic/antiproliferative activity. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase IIB trial assessed sorafenib with capecitabine for locally advanced or metastatic human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) -negative breast cancer. Patients and Methods Patients were randomly assigned to first-or second-line capecitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) orally twice a day for days 1 to 14 of every 21-day cycle with sorafenib 400 mg orally twice a day or placebo. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Results In total, 229 patients were enrolled. The addition of sorafenib to capecitabine resulted in a significant improvement in PFS versus placebo (median, 6.4 v 4.1 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.58; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.81; P = .001) with sorafenib favored across subgroups, including first-line (HR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.30 to 0.82) and second-line (HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.41 to 1.04) treatment. There was no significant improvement for overall survival (median, 22.2 v 20.9 months; HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.61 to 1.23; P = .42) and overall response (38% v 31%; P = .25). Toxicities (sorafenib v placebo) of any grade included rash (22% v 8%), diarrhea (58% v 30%), mucosal inflammation (33% v 21%), neutropenia (13% v 4%), hypertension (18% v 12%), and hand-foot skin reaction/hand-foot syndrome (HFSR/HFS; 90% v 66%); grade 3 to 4 toxicities were comparable between treatment arms except HFSR/HFS (44% v 14%). Reasons for discontinuation in the sorafenib and placebo arms included disease progression (63% v 82%, respectively), adverse events (20% v 9%, respectively), and death (0% v 1%, respectively). Conclusion Addition of sorafenib to capecitabine improved PFS in patients with HER2-negative advanced breast cancer. The dose of sorafenib used in this trial resulted in unacceptable toxicity for many patients. A phase III confirmatory trial has been initiated with a reduced sorafenib dose.

Cediranib Plus FOLFOX/CAPOX Versus Placebo Plus FOLFOX/CAPOX in Patients With Previously Untreated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase III Study (HORIZON II)

Purpose Cediranib is a highly potent inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) signaling with activity against all three VEGF receptors. HORIZON II [Cediranib (AZD2171, RECENTIN) in Addition to Chemotherapy Versus Placebo Plus Chemotherapy in Patients With Untreated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer] assessed infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin/capecitabine and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX/CAPOX) with or without cediranib in patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Patients and Methods Eligible patients were initially randomly assigned 1:1:1 to receive cediranib (20 or 30 mg per day) or placebo plus FOLFOX/CAPOX. In an early analysis of this and two other cediranib studies (HORIZON I [Cediranib Plus FOLFOX6 Versus Bevacizumab Plus FOLFOX6 in Patients With Previously Treated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer] and HORIZON III [Cediranib Plus FOLFOX6 Versus Bevacizumab Plus FOLFOX6 in Patients With Untreated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer]), the 20-mg dose met the predefined criteria for continuation. Subsequent patients were randomly assigned 2: 1 to the cediranib 20 mg or placebo arms. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were coprimary end points. Results In all, 860 patients received cediranib 20 mg (n = 502) or placebo (n = 358). The addition of cediranib to FOLFOX/CAPOX resulted in PFS prolongation (hazard ratio [HR], 0.84; 95% CI, 0.73 to 0.98; P = .0121; median PFS, 8.6 months for cediranib v 8.3 months for placebo) but had no impact on OS (HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.12; P = .5707; median OS, 19.7 months for cediranib v 18.9 months for placebo). There were no significant differences in the secondary end points of objective response rate, duration of response, or liver resection rate. Median chemotherapy dose-intensity was decreased by approximately 10% in patients treated with cediranib. Adverse events (AEs) associated with cediranib were manageable. Conclusion Addition of cediranib 20 mg to FOLFOX/CAPOX resulted in a modest PFS prolongation, but no significant difference in OS. The cediranib AE profile was consistent with those from previous studies. Because of the lack of improvement in OS, cediranib plus an oxaliplatin-based regimen cannot be recommended as a treatment for patients with mCRC. J Clin Oncol 30:3596-3603. (C) 2012 by American Society of Clinical Oncology

Marcatori molecolari circolanti: quale ruolo nei pazienti con tumori solidi?

Background: Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) and circulating free plasma DNA (FPDNA) have been proposed as biomarkers predictive of outcome and response to therapy in solid tumors. We investigated the multiple associations of the presence of CTC and the levels of FPDNA with the outcome and/or the response to chemotherapy in patients with localized breast cancer (LBC), metastatic breast cancer (MBC) and advanced ovarian cancer (AOC). Experimental Design: Blood samples were collected before (baseline), during and after therapy in 40 LBC and 50 AOC patients treated with neo-adjuvant chemotherapy. In 20 MBC patients blood was sampled at baseline and every each cycle of adjuvant chemotherapy. Real time PCR was applied to quantify FPDNA using the Quantifiler Human Quantification kit and CTCs through the detection of tumor-cell specific mRNA levels with or without epithelial enrichment. Results: At baseline CTCs were detected in 90% MBC, 42.5% LBC and 33% AOC patients respectively. The presence of baseline CTC was significantly associated with shorter overall survival (OS) in MBC and AOC patients, and shorter progression free survival (PFS) in LBC patients. Presence of CTCs at the end of neo-adjuvant chemotherapy was detected in 42% LBC and 18% AOC patients and was associated with shorter PFS and OS only in LBC. Increased FPDNA levels at baseline were found in 65% MBC, 17.5% LBC and 76% AOC patients but never related to OS. Baseline FPDNA high levels were associated with shorter PFS only in LBC patients. High FPDNA levels after neo-adjuvant chemotherapy were detected in 57% LBC and 48% AOC patients. Increased FPDNA after neo-adjuvant was associated with response to therapy and shorter PFS in AOC patients. Conclusions: Detection of CTCs may represent a prognostic and predictive biomarker in LBC, MBC and AOC. Quantification of FPDNA could be useful for monitoring response to therapy in AOC patients.

CYP17A1 polymorphisms and clinical outcome of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer treated with abiraterone

Background. Abiraterone acetate is a potent inhibitor of cytochrome P450 17 α-hydrolase (CYP17A1) that causes a reduction in the synthesis of testosterone in the adrenal glands, testes and tumor microenvironment. Blocking androgen production, abiraterone has been shown to prolong progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) previously submitted to chemotherapy. The aim of our study was to verify the role of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in predicting clinical outcome in CRPC patients treated with abiraterone after chemotherapy. Methods. We analyzed 48 CRPC consecutive patients treated with abiraterone after at least one chemotherapeutic regimen with docetaxel. DNA was extracted from peripheral blood and genotyped for four polymorphisms in the CYP17A1 gene (rs743572, rs10883783, rs17115100, rs284849). PFS and OS survival curves were used to identify statistical associations between haplotypes and clinical outcome. Results. Forty-eight Caucasian patients with metastatic CRPC treated with abiraterone were genotyped for polymorphisms in the CYP17A1 gene. All samples were evaluable for both sequencing and TaqMan Genotyping assay. The CRPC patients treated with abiraterone had a median PFS and OS of 7.6 months (95% CI: 4.3-10.5) and 17.6 months (95% CI: 10.5-19.0), respectively Statistical analyses highlighted a difference approaching statistical significance (log-rank test p = 0.0534) between rs10883783 and PFS. Other polymorphisms were not associated with a benefit from treatment with abiraterone. Conclusions. In our case series of 48 treated patients, rs10883783 only was identified as a possible predictive marker, results showing a trend toward statistical significance. Further analysis of this polymorphism is needed in larger series of patients to confirm our findings.

Histone deacetylase inhibitors in adult patients with diffuse large b-cell lymphoma relapsed/refractory: a phase II study with Panobinostat

Backgrounds:Treatment of patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) not eligible to high dose therapy represents an unmet medical need. Panobinostat showed encouraging therapeutic activity in studies conducted in lymphoma cell lines and in vivo in patients with advanced hematologic malignancies.Purpose:FIL-PanAL10 (NCT01523834) is a phase II, prospective multicenter trial of the Fondazione Italiana Linfomi (FIL) to evaluate safety and efficacy of single agent Panobinostat as salvage therapy for R/R DLBCL patients and to evaluate a possible relationships between response and any biological features. Patients and Methods:Patients with R/R DLBCL were included. The treatment plan included 6 induction courses with Panobinostat monotherapy followed by other 6 courses of consolidation. The primary objective was to evaluate Panobinostat activity in terms of overall response (OR); secondary objectives were: CR rate, time to response (TTR), progression-free survival (PFS), safety and feasibility of Panobinostat. We included evaluation of the impact of pharmacogenetics, immunohistochemical patterns and patient’s specific gene expression and mutations as potential predictors of response to Panobinostat as explorative objectives. To this aim a pre-enrollment new tissue biopsy was mandatory. ResultsThirty-five patients, 21 males (60%), were enrolled between June 2011 and March 2014. At the end of induction phase, 7 responses (20%) were observed, including 4 CR (11%), while 28 patients (80%) discontinued treatment due to progressive disease (PD) in 21 (60%) or adverse events in 7 (20%). Median TTR in 9 responders was 2.6 months (range 1.8-12). With a median follow up of 6 months (range 1-34), the estimated 12 months PFS and OS were 27% and 30.5%, respectively. Grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia and neutropenia were the most common toxicities (in 29 (83%) and 12 (34%) patients, respectively. Conclusions The results of this study indicate that Panobinostat might be remarkably active in some patients with R/R DLBCL, showing durable CR