Cilengitide combined with standard treatment for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma with methylated MGMT promoter (CENTRIC EORTC 26071-22072 study): a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Cilengitide is a selective αvβ3 and αvβ5 integrin inhibitor. Data from phase 2 trials suggest that it has antitumour activity as a single agent in recurrent glioblastoma and in combination with standard temozolomide chemoradiotherapy in newly diagnosed glioblastoma (particularly in tumours with methylated MGMT promoter). We aimed to assess cilengitide combined with temozolomide chemoradiotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma with methylated MGMT promoter. METHODS: In this multicentre, open-label, phase 3 study, we investigated the efficacy of cilengitide in patients from 146 study sites in 25 countries. Eligible patients (newly diagnosed, histologically proven supratentorial glioblastoma, methylated MGMT promoter, and age ≥18 years) were stratified for prognostic Radiation Therapy Oncology Group recursive partitioning analysis class and geographic region and centrally randomised in a 1:1 ratio with interactive voice response system to receive temozolomide chemoradiotherapy with cilengitide 2000 mg intravenously twice weekly (cilengitide group) or temozolomide chemoradiotherapy alone (control group). Patients and investigators were unmasked to treatment allocation. Maintenance temozolomide was given for up to six cycles, and cilengitide was given for up to 18 months or until disease progression or unacceptable toxic effects. The primary endpoint was overall survival. We analysed survival outcomes by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00689221. FINDINGS: Overall, 3471 patients were screened. Of these patients, 3060 had tumour MGMT status tested; 926 patients had a methylated MGMT promoter, and 545 were randomly assigned to the cilengitide (n=272) or control groups (n=273) between Oct 31, 2008, and May 12, 2011. Median overall survival was 26·3 months (95% CI 23·8-28·8) in the cilengitide group and 26·3 months (23·9-34·7) in the control group (hazard ratio 1·02, 95% CI 0·81-1·29, p=0·86). None of the predefined clinical subgroups showed a benefit from cilengitide. We noted no overall additional toxic effects with cilengitide treatment. The most commonly reported adverse events of grade 3 or worse in the safety population were lymphopenia (31 [12%] in the cilengitide group vs 26 [10%] in the control group), thrombocytopenia (28 [11%] vs 46 [18%]), neutropenia (19 [7%] vs 24 [9%]), leucopenia (18 [7%] vs 20 [8%]), and convulsion (14 [5%] vs 15 [6%]). INTERPRETATION: The addition of cilengitide to temozolomide chemoradiotherapy did not improve outcomes; cilengitide will not be further developed as an anticancer drug. Nevertheless, integrins remain a potential treatment target for glioblastoma. FUNDING: Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany.

Clinical benefit and quality of life in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer receiving gemcitabine plus capecitabine versus gemcitabine alone: a randomized multicenter phase III clinical trial--SAKK 44/00-CECOG/PAN.1.3.001.

PURPOSE: To compare clinical benefit response (CBR) and quality of life (QOL) in patients receiving gemcitabine (Gem) plus capecitabine (Cap) versus single-agent Gem for advanced/metastatic pancreatic cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive GemCap (oral Cap 650 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1 through 14 plus Gem 1,000 mg/m(2) in a 30-minute infusion on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks) or Gem (1,000 mg/m(2) in a 30-minute infusion weekly for 7 weeks, followed by a 1-week break, and then weekly for 3 weeks every 4 weeks) for 24 weeks or until progression. CBR criteria and QOL indicators were assessed over this period. CBR was defined as improvement from baseline for >or= 4 consecutive weeks in pain (pain intensity or analgesic consumption) and Karnofsky performance status, stability in one but improvement in the other, or stability in pain and performance status but improvement in weight. RESULTS: Of 319 patients, 19% treated with GemCap and 20% treated with Gem experienced a CBR, with a median duration of 9.5 and 6.5 weeks, respectively (P < .02); 54% of patients treated with GemCap and 60% treated with Gem had no CBR (remaining patients were not assessable). There was no treatment difference in QOL (n = 311). QOL indicators were improving under chemotherapy (P < .05). These changes differed by the time to failure, with a worsening 1 to 2 months before treatment failure (all P < .05). CONCLUSION: There is no indication of a difference in CBR or QOL between GemCap and Gem. Regardless of their initial condition, some patients experience an improvement in QOL on chemotherapy, followed by a worsening before treatment failure.

Radioimmunotherapy combined with maintenance anti-CD20 antibody may trigger long-term protective T cell immunity in follicular lymphoma patients.

Growing evidence suggests that the patient's immune response may play a major role in the long-term efficacy of antibody therapies of follicular lymphoma (FL). Particular long-lasting recurrence free survivals have been observed after first line, single agent rituximab or after radioimmunotherapy (RIT). Rituximab maintenance, furthermore, has a major efficacy in prolonging recurrence free survival after chemotherapy. On the other hand, RIT as a single step treatment showed a remarkable capacity to induce complete and partial remissions when applied in recurrence and as initial treatment of FL or given for consolidation. These clinical results strongly suggest that RIT combined with rituximab maintenance could stabilize the high percentages of patients with CR and PR induced by RIT. While the precise mechanisms of the long-term efficacy of these 2 treatments are not elucidated, different observations suggest that the patient's T cell immune response could be decisive. With this review, we discuss the potential role of the patient's immune system under rituximab and RIT and argue that the T cell immunity might be particularly promoted when combining the 2 antibody treatments in the early therapy of FL.

Thymostimulin versus placebo for palliative treatment of locally advanced or metastasised hepatocellular carcinoma: a phase III clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Thymostimulin is a thymic peptide fraction with immune-mediated cytotoxicity against hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in vitro and palliative efficacy in advanced HCC in two independent phase II trials. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of thymostimulin in a phase III trial. METHODS: The study was designed as a prospective randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, multicenter clinical phase III trial. Between 10/2002 and 03/2005, 135 patients with locally advanced or metastasised HCC (Karnofsky >or=60%/Child-Pugh <or= 12) were randomised to receive thymostimulin 75 mg s.c. 5x/week or placebo stratified according to liver function. Primary endpoint was twelve-month survival, secondary endpoints overall survival (OS), time to progression (TTP), tumor response, safety and quality of life. A subgroup analysis according to liver function, KPS and tumor stage (Okuda, CLIP and BCLC) formed part of the protocol. RESULTS: Twelve-month survival was 28% [95%CI 17-41; treatment] and 32% [95%CI 19-44; control] with no significant differences in median OS (5.0 [95% CI 3.7-6.3] vs. 5.2 [95% CI 3.5-6.9] months; p = 0.87, HR = 1.04 [95% CI 0.7-1.6]) or TTP (5.3 [95%CI 2.0-8.6] vs. 2.9 [95%CI 2.6-3.1] months; p = 0.60, HR = 1.13 [95% CI 0.7-1.8]). Adjustment for liver function, Karnofsky status or tumor stage did not affect results. While quality of life was similar in both groups, fewer patients on thymostimulin suffered from accumulating ascites and renal failure. CONCLUSIONS: In our phase III trial, we found no evidence of any benefit to thymostimulin in the treatment of advanced HCC and there is therefore no justification for its use as single-agent treatment. The effect of thymostimulin on hepato-renal function requires further confirmation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN64487365.

Design, conduct, and analyses of Breast International Group (BIG) 1-98: a randomized, double-blind, phase-III study comparing letrozole and tamoxifen as adjuvant endocrine therapy for postmenopausal women with receptor-positive, early breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Aromatase inhibitors provide superior disease control when compared with tamoxifen as adjuvant therapy for postmenopausal women with endocrine-responsive early breast cancer. PURPOSE: To present the design, history, and analytic challenges of the Breast International Group (BIG) 1-98 trial: an international, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, phase-III study comparing the aromatase inhibitor letrozole with tamoxifen in this clinical setting. METHODS: From 1998-2003, BIG 1-98 enrolled 8028 women to receive monotherapy with either tamoxifen or letrozole for 5 years, or sequential therapy of 2 years of one agent followed by 3 years of the other. Randomization to one of four treatment groups permitted two complementary analyses to be conducted several years apart. The first, reported in 2005, provided a head-to-head comparison of letrozole versus tamoxifen. Statistical power was increased by an enriched design, which included patients who were assigned sequential treatments until the time of the treatment switch. The second, reported in late 2008, used a conditional landmark approach to test the hypothesis that switching endocrine agents at approximately 2 years from randomization for patients who are disease-free is superior to continuing with the original agent. RESULTS: The 2005 analysis showed the superiority of letrozole compared with tamoxifen. The patients who were assigned tamoxifen alone were unblinded and offered the opportunity to switch to letrozole. Results from other trials increased the clinical relevance about whether or not to start treatment with letrozole or tamoxifen, and analysis plans were expanded to evaluate sequential versus single-agent strategies from randomization. LIMITATIONS: Due to the unblinding of patients assigned tamoxifen alone, analysis of updated data will require ascertainment of the influence of selective crossover from tamoxifen to letrozole. CONCLUSIONS: BIG 1-98 is an example of an enriched design, involving complementary analyses addressing different questions several years apart, and subject to evolving analytic plans influenced by new data that emerge over time.

Activities of fosfomycin, tigecycline, colistin, and gentamicin against extended-spectrum-β-lactamase-producing Escherichia coli in a foreign-body infection model.

Limited antimicrobial agents are available for the treatment of implant-associated infections caused by fluoroquinolone-resistant Gram-negative bacilli. We compared the activities of fosfomycin, tigecycline, colistin, and gentamicin (alone and in combination) against a CTX-M15-producing strain of Escherichia coli (Bj HDE-1) in vitro and in a foreign-body infection model. The MIC and the minimal bactericidal concentration in logarithmic phase (MBC(log)) and stationary phase (MBC(stat)) were 0.12, 0.12, and 8 μg/ml for fosfomycin, 0.25, 32, and 32 μg/ml for tigecycline, 0.25, 0.5, and 2 μg/ml for colistin, and 2, 8, and 16 μg/ml for gentamicin, respectively. In time-kill studies, colistin showed concentration-dependent activity, but regrowth occurred after 24 h. Fosfomycin demonstrated rapid bactericidal activity at the MIC, and no regrowth occurred. Synergistic activity between fosfomycin and colistin in vitro was observed, with no detectable bacterial counts after 6 h. In animal studies, fosfomycin reduced planktonic counts by 4 log(10) CFU/ml, whereas in combination with colistin, tigecycline, or gentamicin, it reduced counts by >6 log(10) CFU/ml. Fosfomycin was the only single agent which was able to eradicate E. coli biofilms (cure rate, 17% of implanted, infected cages). In combination, colistin plus tigecycline (50%) and fosfomycin plus gentamicin (42%) cured significantly more infected cages than colistin plus gentamicin (33%) or fosfomycin plus tigecycline (25%) (P < 0.05). The combination of fosfomycin plus colistin showed the highest cure rate (67%), which was significantly better than that of fosfomycin alone (P < 0.05). In conclusion, the combination of fosfomycin plus colistin is a promising treatment option for implant-associated infections caused by fluoroquinolone-resistant Gram-negative bacilli.

Cohort profile: the Swiss HIV Cohort study.

The substantial recurrence rate of colorectal cancer following potentially curative resection has fuelled the search for effective adjuvant therapy. Previous trials using 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) as a single agent or in combination chemotherapy regimens have not demonstrated meaningful benefits, an impression reflected in the results of a meta-analysis encompassing large patient numbers. Newer developments utilizing intraportal chemotherapy and the combination of 5-FU and levamisole have resulted in lower recurrence rates and improved survival in patients with colon cancer. In advanced disease, the biochemical modulation of 5-FU by Leucovorin has been shown to prolong survival in some studies. Combined chemotherapy and radiotherapy or chemotherapy alone have showed promising results in rectal cancer. These developments have now been incorporated into ongoing trials.

Occurrence of sectoral choroidal occlusive vasculopathy and retinal arteriolar embolization after superselective ophthalmic artery chemotherapy for advanced intraocular retinoblastoma.

BACKGROUND:: Superselective ophthalmic artery chemotherapy (SOAC) has recently been proposed as an alternative to intravenous chemoreduction for advanced intraocular retinoblastoma. Preliminary results appear promising in terms of tumor control and eye conservation, but little is known regarding ocular toxicity and visual prognosis. In this study, we report on the vascular adverse effects observed in our initial cohort of 13 patients. METHODS:: The charts of 13 consecutive patients with retinoblastoma who received a total of 30 injections (up to 3 injections of a single agent per patient at 3-week interval) of melphalan (0.35 mg/kg) in the ophthalmic artery between November 2008 and June 2010 were retrospectively reviewed. RetCam fundus photography and fluorescein angiography were performed at presentation and before each injection. Vision was assessed at the latest visit. RESULTS:: Enucleation and external beam radiotherapy could be avoided in all cases but one, with a mean follow-up of 7 months. Sectoral choroidal occlusive vasculopathy leading to chorioretinal atrophy was observed temporally in 2 eyes (15%) 3 weeks to 6 weeks after the beginning of SOAC and retinal arteriolar emboli in 1 eye 2 weeks after injection. There was no stroke or other clinically significant systemic side effects except a peroperative transient spasm of the internal carotid artery in one patient. Vision ranged between 20/1600 and 20/32 depending on the status of the macula. CONCLUSION:: Superselective ophthalmic artery chemotherapy was effective in all patients with no stroke or other systemic vascular complications. Unlike intravenous chemoreduction, SOAC is associated with potentially sight-threatening adverse effects, such as severe chorioretinal atrophy secondary to subacute choroidal occlusive vasculopathy or central retinal artery embolism, not to mention the risk of ophthalmic artery obstruction, which was not observed in this series. Further analysis of the risks and benefits of SOAC will define its role within the therapeutic arsenal. Meanwhile, we suggest that SOAC should be given in one eye only and restricted to advanced cases of retinoblastoma, as an alternative to enucleation and/or external beam radiotherapy.

Temozolomide combined with bevacizumab in metastatic melanoma. A multicenter phase II trial (SAKK 50/07)

Background: Single agent DTIC is the standard therapy for metastatic melanoma (MM) with response rates of 5−20%. Temozolomide (Tem) as an oral drug has shown equal efficacy in phase III trials. Preclinical models have shown an inhibitory effect for bevacizumab (Bev) on the proliferation of melanoma cells as well as on sprouting endothelial cells. Therefore, a therapeutic approach that combines angiogenesis inhibitors with cytotoxic agents may provide clinical benefit in MM. Methods: Design: Multicenter phase II trial. Primary endpoint: Clinical benefit (CR, PR and SD) at 12 weeks; secondary endpoints: best overall response by RECIST, response duration, progression free survival, adverse events, survival after 6 months and overall survival. Sample size was calculated according to Simon's two stage optimal design (5% significance level and 80% power) with an overall sample size of 62 patients (pts) to test H0: 20% versus H1: 35% rate of clinical benefit. Response assessment was done every 6 weeks (3 cycles). Eligibility: Stage IV MM, ECOG PS 0−2, no prior treatment for metastatic disease. Treatment regimen: One cycle consisted of Tem at 150 mg/m2 days 1−7 po and Bev at 10 mg/kg day 1 over 30 min iv and was repeated every 2 weeks until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Results: Between January 2008 and April 2009, 62 pts (40 male/22 female) at a median age of 61 years (range 30−86) with stage IV (M1a:4, M1b:12, M1c:46) melanoma were enrolled in 9 centers. The first 50 pts, who received 415 cycles are included in this interim report. The overall response rate was 26% (CR: 1 pt, PR: 12 pts; PR not confirmed yet in 3 pts), and 44% (22 pts) had stable disease over 1.5−7.5 months (median: 3). Only 30% (15 pts) had disease progression at the first evaluation at week 6. The hematological grade 3/4 toxicities according to NCI CTAE 3.0 were thrombocytopenia 10% (5 pts), neutropenia 8% (4 pts), lymphopenia and leucocytopenia each 2% (1 pt). Cumulative non-hematological toxicities grade 3/4 were nausea and fatigue each 6% (3 pts), hypertension, vomiting and hemorrhage, each 4% (2 pts), thrombosis/embolism, infection, constipation, anorexia, elevation of alkaline phosphatase, bilirubin, GGT, ALT and AST each 2% (1 pt). Conclusion: In metastatic melanoma the combination of Tem/Bev is a safe regimen with a promising efficacy and few grade 3/4 toxicities. Updated results of all 62 pts will be presented.

The role of integrins in glioma biology and anti-glioma therapies.

The tumor environment is critical for tumor maintenance and progression. Integrins are a large family of cell surface receptors mediating the interaction of tumor cells with their microenvironment and play important roles in glioma biology, including migration, invasion, angiogenesis and tumor stem cell anchorage. Here, we review preclinical and clinical data on integrin inhibition in malignant gliomas. Various pharmacological approaches to the modulation of integrin signaling have been explored including antibodies and peptide-based agents. Cilengitide, a cyclic RGD-mimetic peptide of αvβ3 and αvβ5 integrins is in advanced clinical development in glioblastoma. Cilengitide had only limited activity as a single agent in glioblastoma, but, when added to standard radiochemotherapy, appeared to prolong progression-free and overall survival in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastomas and methylation of the promoter of the O⁶ methylguanine methyltransferase (MGMT) gene. MGMT gene promoter methylation in turn predicts benefit from alkylating chemotherapy. A phase III randomized clinical trial in conjunction with standard radiochemotherapy in newly diagnosed glioblastoma patients with MGMT gene promoter methylation has recently completed accrual (EORTC 26071-22072). A companion trial explores a dose-escalated regimen of cilengitide added to radiotherapy plus temozolomide in patients without MGMT gene promoter methylation. Promising results in these trials would probably result in a broader interest in integrins as targets for glioma therapy and hopefully the development of a broader panel of anti-integrin agents.

Cancer chronotherapeutics: experimental, theoretical, and clinical aspects.

The circadian timing system controls cell cycle, apoptosis, drug bioactivation, and transport and detoxification mechanisms in healthy tissues. As a consequence, the tolerability of cancer chemotherapy varies up to several folds as a function of circadian timing of drug administration in experimental models. Best antitumor efficacy of single-agent or combination chemotherapy usually corresponds to the delivery of anticancer drugs near their respective times of best tolerability. Mathematical models reveal that such coincidence between chronotolerance and chronoefficacy is best explained by differences in the circadian and cell cycle dynamics of host and cancer cells, especially with regard circadian entrainment and cell cycle variability. In the clinic, a large improvement in tolerability was shown in international randomized trials where cancer patients received the same sinusoidal chronotherapy schedule over 24h as compared to constant-rate infusion or wrongly timed chronotherapy. However, sex, genetic background, and lifestyle were found to influence optimal chronotherapy scheduling. These findings support systems biology approaches to cancer chronotherapeutics. They involve the systematic experimental mapping and modeling of chronopharmacology pathways in synchronized cell cultures and their adjustment to mouse models of both sexes and distinct genetic background, as recently shown for irinotecan. Model-based personalized circadian drug delivery aims at jointly improving tolerability and efficacy of anticancer drugs based on the circadian timing system of individual patients, using dedicated circadian biomarker and drug delivery technologies.

Azacytidine for acute myeloid leukemia in elderly or frail patients: a phase II trial (SAKK 30/07).

Abstract This phase II trial treated elderly or frail patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) with single-agent subcutaneous azacytidine at 100 mg/m(2), on 5 of 28 days for up to six cycles. Treatment was stopped for lack of response, or continued to progression in responders. The primary endpoint was response within 6 months. A response rate ≥ 34% was considered a positive trial outcome. From September 2008 to April 2010, 45 patients from 10 centers (median age 74 [55-86] years) were accrued. Patients received four (1-21) cycles. Best response was complete response/complete response with incomplete recovery of neutrophils and/or platelets (CR/CRi) in eight (18%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 8-32%.), 0 (0%) partial response (PR), seven (16%) hematologic improvement, 17 (38%) stable disease. Three non-responding patients stopped treatment after six cycles, 31 patients stopped early and 11 patients continued treatment for 8-21 cycles. Adverse events (grade ≥ III) were infections (n = 13), febrile neutropenia (n = 8), thrombocytopenia (n = 7), dyspnea (p = 6), bleeding (n = 5) and anemia (n = 4). Median overall survival was 6 months. Peripheral blood blast counts, grouped at 30%, had a borderline significant association with response (p = 0.07). This modified azacytidine schedule is feasible for elderly or frail patients with AML in an outpatient setting with moderate, mainly hematologic, toxicity and response in a proportion of patients, although the primary objective was not reached.

Treatment of brain metastases from non-small cell lung cancer with whole-brain radiotherapy (wbrt) in combination with gefitinib (gft) or temozolomide (tmz): a randomized multicenter phase ii trial of the swiss group of clinical cancer research (sakk #70/03)

BACKGROUND: Patients with BM rarely survive .6 months and are commonly excluded from clinical trials. We aimed at improving outcome by exploring 2 combined modality regimens with at the time novel agents for which single-agent activity had been shown. METHODS: NSCLC patients with multiple BM were randomized to WBRT (10 × 3 Gy) and either GFT 250 mg p.o. daily or TMZ 75 mg/m2 p.o. daily ×21/28 days, starting on Day 1 of RT and to be continued until PD. Primary endpoint was overall survival, a Simon's optimal 2-stage design was based on assumptions for the 3-month survival rate. Cognitive functioning and quality of life were also evaluated. RESULTS: Fifty-nine patients (36 M, 23 F; 9 after prior chemo) were included. Median age was 61 years (range 46-82), WHO PS was 0 in 18 patients, 1 in 31 patients, and 2 in 10 patients. All but 1 patients had extracranial disease; 33 of 43 (TMZ) and 15 of 16 (GFT) had adenocarcinoma histology. GFT arm was closed early after stage 1 analysis when the prespecified 3-mo survival rate threshold (66%) was not reached, causes of death were not GFT related. Main causes of death were PD in the CNS 24%, systemic 41%, both 8%, and toxicity 10% [intestinal perforation (2 patients), pneumonia (2), pulmonary emboli (1), pneumonitis NOS (1), seizure (1)]. We summarize here other patients' characteristics for the 2 trial arms: TMZ (n ¼ 43)/GFT (n ¼ 16); median treatment duration: 1.6 /1.8 mo; Grade 3-4 toxicity: lymphopenia 5 patients (12%)/0; fatigue 8 patients (19%)/2 patients (13%). Survival data for TMZ/GFT arms: 3-month survival rate: 58.1% (95% CI 42.1-73)/62.5% (95% CI 35- 85); median OS: 4.9 months (95% CI 2.5-5.6)/6.3 months (95% CI 2.2- 14.6); median PFS: 1.8 months (95% CI 1.5-1.8)/1.8 (95% CI 1.1-3.9); median time to neurol. progr.: 8.0 months (95% CI 2.2-X)/4.8 (95% CI 3.9-10.5). In a model to predict survival time including the variables' age, PS, number of BM, global QL, total MMSE score, and subjective cognitive function, none of the variables accounted for a significant improvement in survival time. CONCLUSIONS: The combinations of WBRT with GFT or TMZ were feasible. However, in this unselected patient population, survival remains poor and a high rate of complication was observed. Four patients died as a result of high-dose corticosteroids. Preliminary evaluation of cognitive function andQL failed to show significant improvement. Indications and patient selection for palliative treatment should be revisited and careful monitoring and supportive care is required. Research and progress for this frequent clinical situation is urgently needed. Trial partly supported by AstraZeneca (Switzerland), Essex Chemie (Switzerland) and Swiss Federal Government.

Effects of preset sequential administrations of sunitinib and everolimus on tumour differentiation in Caki-1 renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Sunitinib (VEGFR/PDGFR inhibitor) and everolimus (mTOR inhibitor) are both approved for advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) as first-line and second-line therapy, respectively. In the clinics, sunitinib treatment is limited by the emergence of acquired resistance, leading to a switch to second-line treatment at progression, often based on everolimus. No data have been yet generated on programmed alternating sequential strategies combining alternative use of sunitinib and everolimus before progression. Such strategy is expected to delay the emergence of acquired resistance and improve tumour control. The aim of our study was to assess the changes in tumours induced by three different sequences administration of sunitinib and everolimus. METHODS: In human Caki-1 RCC xenograft model, sunitinib was alternated with everolimus every week, every 2 weeks, or every 3 weeks. Effects on necrosis, hypoxia, angiogenesis, and EMT status were assessed by immunohisochemistry and immunofluorescence. RESULTS: Sunitinib and everolimus programmed sequential regimens before progression yielded longer median time to tumour progression than sunitinib and everolimus monotherapies. In each group of treatment, tumour growth control was associated with inhibition of mTOR pathway and changes from a mesenchymal towards an epithelial phenotype, with a decrease in vimentin and an increase in E-cadherin expression. The sequential combinations of these two agents in a RCC mouse clinical trial induced antiangiogenic effects, leading to tumour necrosis. CONCLUSIONS: In summary, our study showed that alternate sequence of sunitinib and everolimus mitigated the development of mesenchymal phenotype compared with sunitinib as single agent.

Can resistance to trastuzumab be reversed by endocrine therapy? Combination of trastuzumab and letrozole after resistance to sequential trastuzumab and aromatase inhibitor monotherapies in patients with ER-positive, HER-2 positive, advanced breast cancer: a proof-of-concept trial (SAKK 23/03)

Introduction: Trastuzumab (T) is a cornerstone in the treatment of patients with HER2-overexpressing advanced breast cancer and development of resistance to T is a major therapeutic problem. HER-2 is part of a highly interactive signaling network that may impair efficacy of endocrine therapy. A sequential treatment design was chosen in this trial to ensure complete resistance to single agent therapy before receiving both a non-steroidal aromatase inhibitor (AI) and T. Any kind of clinical activity with combined treatment of AI and T after progression of single agent treatments could indicate restoration of sensitivity as a consequence of cross-talking and networking between both pathways. Methods: Key eligibility criteria included postmenopausal patients (pts.) with advanced, measurable, HER-2 positive (assessed by FISH, ratio (≥2)), HR positive disease and progression on prior treatment with a non-steroidal AI, e.g. letrozole or anastrozole, either in an adjuvant or advanced setting. Pts. received standard dose T monotherapy either weekly or three-weekly in step 1 and upon disease progression, continued T in combination with letrozole in step 2. The primary endpoint was clinical benefit response (CBR: CR, PR or SD for at least 24 weeks (+/- 1 week) according to RECIST) in step 2. Results: Thirteen pts. were enrolled in five centers in Switzerland. In step 1, six pts. (46%) achieved CBR. Median time to progression (TTP) was 161 days (Range: 50 - 627). Based on data collected until the end of May 2010, CBR was observed in seven out of the eleven evaluable pts. (64%) in step 2, including one pt. with partial response. Four of the seven pts. within step 2 that achieved CBR also had CBR in step 1. Seven out of eleven pts. have documented tumor progression during step 2 treatment. Median TTP for all eleven pts. was 184 days (range 61 - 471). Mean time on study treatment (TTP in step 1 plus TTP in step 2) for pts. reaching step 2 was 380 days (range 174 - 864). Adverse events were generally mild. Conclusion: Results of this proof-of-principle trial suggest that complete resistance to both AI and T can be overcome in a proportion of pts. by combined treatment of AI and T, as all pts. served as their own control. Our results appear promising for a new treatment strategy which offers a chemotherapy-free and well-tolerated option for at least a subset of the pts. with HR positive, HER-2 positive breast cancer. Further trials will need to corroborate this finding.