Panitumumab is a fully human monoclonal antibody directed against the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). We compared the activity of panitumumab plus best supportive care (BSC) to that of BSC ...alone in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who had progressed after standard chemotherapy.
We randomly assigned 463 patients with 1% or more EGFR tumor cell membrane staining, measurable disease, and radiologic documentation of disease progression during or within 6 months of most recent chemotherapy to panitumumab 6 mg/kg every 2 weeks plus BSC (n = 231) or BSC alone (n = 232). Tumor assessments by blinded central review were scheduled from week 8 until disease progression. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points included objective response, overall survival (OS), and safety. BSC patients who progressed could receive panitumumab in a cross-over study.
Panitumumab significantly prolonged PFS (hazard ratio HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.66, P < .0001). Median PFS time was 8 weeks (95% CI, 7.9 to 8.4) for panitumumab and 7.3 weeks (95% CI, 7.1 to 7.7) for BSC. Mean (standard error) PFS time was 13.8 (0.8) weeks for panitumumab and 8.5 (0.5) weeks for BSC. Objective response rates also favored panitumumab over BSC; after a 12-month minimum follow-up, response rates were 10% for panitumumab and 0% for BSC (P < .0001). No difference was observed in OS (HR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.82 to 1.22), which was confounded by similar activity of panitumumab after 76% of BSC patients entered the cross-over study. Panitumumab was well tolerated. Skin toxicities, hypomagnesaemia, and diarrhea were the most common toxicities observed. No patients had grade 3/4 infusion reactions.
Panitumumab significantly improved PFS with manageable toxicity in patients with chemorefractory colorectal cancer.
The selective MEK1/2 inhibitor pimasertib has shown anti‐tumour activity in a pancreatic tumour model. This phase I/II, two‐part trial was conducted in patients with metastatic pancreatic ...adenocarcinoma (mPaCa) (NCT01016483). In the phase I part, oral pimasertib was given once daily discontinuously (5 days on/2 days off treatment) or twice daily continuously (n = 53) combined with weekly gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m2) in 28‐day cycles to identify the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of pimasertib. In the phase II part, patients were randomised to pimasertib (RP2D) or placebo plus weekly gemcitabine (n = 88) to investigate progression‐free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and safety. The RP2D was determined to be 60 mg BID. PFS and OS outcomes did not indicate any treatment benefit for pimasertib over placebo in combination with gemcitabine (median PFS 3.7 and 2.8 months, respectively, HR = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.58–1.42: median OS 7.3 vs. 7.6 months, respectively). KRAS status did not influence PFS or OS. The incidence of grade ≥3 adverse events was 91.1% and 85.7% for pimasertib/gemcitabine and placebo/gemcitabine respectively, but there was a higher incidence of ocular events with pimasertib/gemcitabine (28.9% vs. 4.8% for placebo/gemcitabine). In conclusion, no clinical benefit was observed with first‐line pimasertib plus gemcitabine compared with gemcitabine alone in patients with mPaCa.
What's new?
Pimasertib is an orally bioavailable small molecule inhibitor of the mitogen‐activated protein kinase kinase 1/2 (MEK1/2) with promise in cancer therapy. Here the authors designed a two‐part clinical trial testing pimasertib combined with the standard of care drug gemcitabine in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. No evidence of clinical benefit was observed in the phase II part despite efficacy having been observed in the phase I part, underscoring the need to confirm phase I data in randomized phase II trials.
Patients who have colorectal cancer with
RAS
mutations in exon 2 are unlikely to respond to EGFR blockers. A retrospective analysis of tumors containing other, less common
RAS
mutations confirms that ...any
RAS
mutation is associated with EGFR resistance.
KRAS
mutation is an established predictive biomarker of resistance to anti–epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.
1
–
4
Specifically, patients with
KRAS
mutations in exon 2 do not have a response to anti-EGFR therapy and may have inferior outcomes if this therapy is combined with an oxaliplatin-containing chemotherapy regimen.
2
,
5
More accurate selection of patients according to the genetic status of the tumor may improve the benefit–risk profile of anti-EGFR therapy.
Activating mutations in
RAS
(
KRAS
or
NRAS
) in addition to
KRAS
mutations in exon 2 have been suggested as negative predictive biomarkers . . .
Panitumumab, a fully human anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) monoclonal antibody that improves progression-free survival (PFS), is approved as monotherapy for patients with ...chemotherapy-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The Panitumumab Randomized Trial in Combination With Chemotherapy for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer to Determine Efficacy (PRIME) was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of panitumumab plus infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX4) versus FOLFOX4 alone as initial treatment for mCRC.
In this multicenter, phase III trial, patients with no prior chemotherapy for mCRC, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 2, and available tissue for biomarker testing were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive panitumumab-FOLFOX4 versus FOLFOX4. The primary end point was PFS; overall survival (OS) was a secondary end point. Results were prospectively analyzed on an intent-to-treat basis by tumor KRAS status.
KRAS results were available for 93% of the 1,183 patients randomly assigned. In the wild-type (WT) KRAS stratum, panitumumab-FOLFOX4 significantly improved PFS compared with FOLFOX4 (median PFS, 9.6 v 8.0 months, respectively; hazard ratio HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.97; P = .02). A nonsignificant increase in OS was also observed for panitumumab-FOLFOX4 versus FOLFOX4 (median OS, 23.9 v 19.7 months, respectively; HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.67 to 1.02; P = .072). In the mutant KRAS stratum, PFS was significantly reduced in the panitumumab-FOLFOX4 arm versus the FOLFOX4 arm (HR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.62; P = .02), and median OS was 15.5 months versus 19.3 months, respectively (HR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.98 to 1.57; P = .068). Adverse event rates were generally comparable across arms with the exception of toxicities known to be associated with anti-EGFR therapy.
This study demonstrated that panitumumab-FOLFOX4 was well tolerated and significantly improved PFS in patients with WT KRAS tumors and underscores the importance of KRAS testing for patients with mCRC.
In advanced oestrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer, acquired resistance to aromatase inhibitors frequently stems from ESR1-mutated subclones, which might be sensitive to ...fulvestrant. The PADA-1 trial aimed to show the efficacy of an early change in therapy on the basis of a rising ESR1 mutation in blood (bESR1mut), while assessing the global safety of combination fulvestrant and palbociclib.
We did a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial in 83 hospitals in France. Women aged at least 18 years with oestrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0–2 were recruited and monitored for rising bESR1mut during first-line aromatase inhibitor (2·5 mg letrozole, 1 mg anastrozole, or 25 mg exemestane, orally once per day, taken continuously) and palbociclib (125 mg orally once per day on days 1–21 of a 28-day cycle) therapy. Patients with newly present or increased bESR1mut in circulating tumour DNA and no synchronous disease progression were randomly assigned (1:1) to continue with the same therapy or to switch to fulvestrant (500 mg intramuscularly on day 1 of each 28-day cycle and on day 15 of cycle 1) and palbociclib (dosing unchanged). The randomisation sequence was generated within an interactive web response system using a minimisation method (with an 80% random factor); patients were stratified according to visceral involvement (present or absent) and the time from inclusion to bESR1mut detection (<12 months or ≥12 months). The co-primary endpoints were investigator-assessed progression-free survival from random assignment, analysed in the intention-to-treat population (ie, all randomly assigned patients), and grade 3 or worse haematological adverse events in all patients. The trial is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03079011), and is now complete.
From March 22, 2017, to Jan 31, 2019, 1017 patients were included, of whom 279 (27%) developed a rising bESR1mut and 172 (17%) were randomly assigned to treatment: 88 to switching to fulvestrant and palbociclib and 84 patients to continuing aromatase inhibitor and palbociclib. At database lock on July 31, 2021, randomly assigned patients had a median follow-up of 35·3 months (IQR 29·2–41·4) from inclusion and 26·0 months (13·8–34·3) from random assignment. Median progression-free survival from random assignment was 11·9 months (95% CI 9·1–13·6) in the fulvestrant and palbociclib group versus 5·7 months (3·9–7·5) in the aromatase inhibitor and palbociclib group (stratified HR 0·61, 0·43–0·86; p=0·0040). The most frequent grade 3 or worse haematological adverse events were neutropenia (715 70·3% of 1017 patients), lymphopenia (66 6·5%), and thrombocytopenia (20 2·0%). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events in step 2 were neutropenia (35 41·7% of 84 patients in the aromatase inhibitor and palbociclib group vs 39 44·3% of 88 patients in the fulvestrant and palbociclib group) and lymphopenia (three 3·6% vs four 4·5%). 31 (3·1%) patients had grade 3 or worse serious adverse events related to treatment in the overall population. Three (1·7%) of 172 patients randomly assigned had one serious adverse event in step 2: one (1·2%) grade 4 neutropenia and one (1·2%) grade 3 fatigue among 84 patients in the aromatase inhibitor and palbociclib group, and one (1·1%) grade 4 neutropenia among 88 patients in the fulvestrant and palbociclib group. One death by pulmonary embolism in step 1 was declared as being treatment related.
PADA-1 is the first prospective randomised trial showing that the early therapeutic targeting of bESR1mut results in significant clinical benefit. Additionally, the original design explored in PADA-1 might help with tackling acquired resistance with new drugs in future trials.
Pfizer.
Heterogeneity and lack of targeted therapies represent the two main impediments to precision treatment of triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), and therefore, molecular subtyping and identification ...of therapeutic pathways are required to optimize medical care. The aim of the present study was to define robust TNBC subtypes with clinical relevance.
Gene expression profiling by means of DNA chips was conducted in an internal TNBC cohort composed of 238 patients. In addition, external data (n = 257), obtained by using the same DNA chip, were used for validation. Fuzzy clustering was followed by functional annotation of the clusters. Immunohistochemistry was used to confirm transcriptomics results: CD138 and CD20 were used to test for plasma cell and B lymphocyte infiltrations, respectively; MECA79 and CD31 for tertiary lymphoid structures; and UCHL1/PGP9.5 and S100 for neurogenesis.
We identified three molecular clusters within TNBC: one molecular apocrine (C1) and two basal-like-enriched (C2 and C3). C2 presented pro-tumorigenic immune response (immune suppressive), high neurogenesis (nerve infiltration), and high biological aggressiveness. In contrast, C3 exhibited adaptive immune response associated with complete B cell differentiation that occurs in tertiary lymphoid structures, and immune checkpoint upregulation. External cohort subtyping by means of the same approach proved the robustness of these results. Furthermore, plasma cell and B lymphocyte infiltrates, tertiary lymphoid structures, and neurogenesis were validated at the protein levels by means of histological evaluation and immunohistochemistry.
Our work showed that TNBC can be subcategorized in three different subtypes characterized by marked biological features, some of which could be targeted by specific therapies.
To evaluate panitumumab plus modified fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (mFOLFOX6) or bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX6 in patients with previously untreated wild-type (WT) KRAS exon 2 (codons 12 and ...13) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). A prespecified secondary objective was to assess treatment effects in an extended RAS analysis that included exons 2, 3, and 4 of KRAS and NRAS.
Patients with WT KRAS exon 2 tumors were randomly assigned at a one-to-one ratio to panitumumab plus mFOLFOX6 or bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX6. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary end points included overall survival (OS) and safety.
Of 285 randomly assigned patients, 278 received treatment. In the WT KRAS exon 2 intent-to-treat group, PFS was similar between arms (hazard ratio HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.65 to 1.17; P = .353). Median OS was 34.2 and 24.3 months in the panitumumab and bevacizumab arms, respectively (HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.89; P = .009). In the WT RAS subgroup (WT exons 2, 3, and 4 of KRAS and NRAS), PFS favored the panitumumab arm (HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.96; P = .029). Median OS was 41.3 and 28.9 months (HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.39 to 1.02; P = .058) in the panitumumab and bevacizumab arms, respectively. Treatment discontinuation rates because of adverse events were similar between arms.
PFS was similar and OS was improved with panitumumab relative to bevacizumab when combined with mFOLFOX6 in patients with WT KRAS exon 2 tumors. Patients with WT RAS tumors seemed to experience more clinical benefit with anti-epidermal growth factor receptor therapy.
To evaluate the efficacy of trastuzumab in patients with node-positive breast cancer treated with surgery, adjuvant chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and hormone therapy if applicable.
Three thousand ten ...patients with operable node-positive breast cancer were randomly assigned to receive adjuvant anthracycline-based chemotherapy with or without docetaxel. Patients who presented human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) -overexpressing tumors were secondary randomly assigned to either a sequential regimen of trastuzumab (6 mg/kg every 3 weeks) for 1 year or observation. The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS).
Overall 528 patients were randomly assigned between trastuzumab (n = 260) and observation (n = 268) arm. Of the 234 patients (90%) who received at least one administration of trastuzumab, 196 (84%) received at least 6 months of treatment, and 41 (18%) discontinued treatment due to cardiac events (any grade). At the date of analysis (October 2007), 129 DFS events were recorded. Random assignment to the trastuzumab arm was associated with a nonsignificant 14% reduction in the risk of relapse (hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.61 to 1.22; P = .41, log-rank stratified on pathologic node involvement). Three-year DFS rates were 78% (95% CI, 72.3 to 82.5) and 81% (95% CI, 75.3 to 85.4) in the observation and trastuzumab arms, respectively.
After a 47-month median follow-up, 1 year of trastuzumab given sequentially after adjuvant chemotherapy was not associated with a statistically significant decrease in the risk of relapse.
Background
Inflammation is associated with a worse outcome in cancer and neutrophil:lymphocyte ratio (NLR) is a strong prognostic value. In cancer, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) could ...be of interest. We investigated the prognostic significance of NLR and the impact of intraoperative NSAIDs in cancer surgeries.
Methods
We performed an observational study in early breast, kidney, and lung cancers (357, 227, and 255 patients) with uni- and multivariate analyses (Cox model).
Results
In breast cancer (Centre 1), NLR ≥ 4 is associated with a higher risk of relapse (hazards ratio (HR) = 2.41; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.01–5.76;
P
= 0.048). In breast cancer (Centre 2), NLR ≥ 3 is associated with a higher risk of relapse (HR = 4.6; 95 % CI 1.09–19.1;
P
= 0.04) and higher mortality (HR = 4.0; 95 % CI 1.12–14.3;
P
= 0.03). In kidney cancer, NLR ≥ 5 is associated with a higher risk of relapse (HR = 1.63; 95 % CI 1.00–2.66;
P
= 0.05) and higher mortality (HR = 1.67; 95 % CI 1.0–2.81;
P
= 0.05). In lung cancer, NLR ≥ 5 is associated with higher mortality (HR = 1.45; 95 % CI 1.02–2.06;
P
= 0.04). The intraoperative use of NSAIDs in breast cancer patients (Centre 1) is associated with a reduced recurrence rate (HR = 0.17; 95 % CI 0.04–0.43;
P
= 0.0002) and a lower mortality (HR = 0.25; 95 % CI 1.08–0.75;
P
= 0.01). NSAIDs use at the beginning of the surgery is independently associated with a lower metastases risk after lung cancer surgery (HR = 0.16; 95 % CI 0.04–0.63;
P
= 0.009). Ketorolac use is independently associated with longer survival (HR = 0.55; 95 % CI 0.31–0.95;
P
= 0.03).
Conclusions
In these cohorts, these analyses show that NLR is a strong perioperative prognosis factor for breast, lung, and kidney cancers. In this context, intraoperative NSAIDs administration could be associated with a better outcome.
Immune checkpoint inhibitors are a new standard of care for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) without EGFR tyrosine kinase or anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) genetic ...aberrations (EGFR−/ALK−), but clinical benefit in patients with EGFR mutations or ALK rearrangements (EGFR+/ALK+) has not been shown. We assessed the effect of durvalumab (anti-PD-L1) treatment in three cohorts of patients with NSCLC defined by EGFR/ALK status and tumour expression of PD-L1.
ATLANTIC is a phase 2, open-label, single-arm trial at 139 study centres in Asia, Europe, and North America. Eligible patients had advanced NSCLC with disease progression following at least two previous systemic regimens, including platinum-based chemotherapy (and tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy if indicated); were aged 18 years or older; had a WHO performance status score of 0 or 1; and measurable disease per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1. Key exclusion criteria included mixed small-cell lung cancer and NSCLC histology; previous exposure to any anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1 antibody; and any previous grade 3 or worse immune-related adverse event while receiving any immunotherapy agent. Patients in cohort 1 had EGFR+/ALK+ NSCLC with at least 25%, or less than 25%, of tumour cells with PD-L1 expression. Patients in cohorts 2 and 3 had EGFR−/ALK− NSCLC; cohort 2 included patients with at least 25%, or less than 25%, of tumour cells with PD-L1 expression, and cohort 3 included patients with at least 90% of tumour cells with PD-L1 expression. Patients received durvalumab (10 mg/kg) every 2 weeks, via intravenous infusion, for up to 12 months. Retreatment was allowed for patients who benefited but then progressed after completing 12 months. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with increased tumour expression of PD-L1 (defined as ≥25% of tumour cells in cohorts 1 and 2, and ≥90% of tumour cells in cohort 3) who achieved an objective response, assessed in patients who were evaluable for response per independent central review according to RECIST version 1.1. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of durvalumab and for whom any post-dose data were available. The trial is ongoing, but is no longer open to accrual, and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02087423.
Between Feb 25, 2014, and Dec 28, 2015, 444 patients were enrolled and received durvalumab: 111 in cohort 1, 265 in cohort 2, and 68 in cohort 3. Among patients with at least 25% of tumour cells expressing PD-L1 who were evaluable for objective response per independent central review, an objective response was achieved in 9 (12·2%, 95% CI 5·7–21·8) of 74 patients in cohort 1 and 24 (16·4%, 10·8–23·5) of 146 patients in cohort 2. In cohort 3, 21 (30·9%, 20·2–43·3) of 68 patients achieved an objective response. Grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 40 (9%) of 444 patients overall: six (5%) of 111 patients in cohort 1, 22 (8%) of 265 in cohort 2, and 12 (18%) of 68 in cohort 3. The most common treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events were pneumonitis (four patients 1%), elevated gamma-glutamyltransferase (four 1%), diarrhoea (three 1%), infusion-related reaction (three 1%), elevated aspartate aminotransferase (two <1%), elevated transaminases (two <1%), vomiting (two <1%), and fatigue (two <1%). Treatment-related serious adverse events occurred in 27 (6%) of 444 patients overall: five (5%) of 111 patients in cohort 1, 14 (5%) of 265 in cohort 2, and eight (12%) of 68 in cohort 3. The most common serious adverse events overall were pneumonitis (five patients 1%), fatigue (three 1%), and infusion-related reaction (three 1%). Immune-mediated events were manageable with standard treatment guidelines.
In patients with advanced and heavily pretreated NSCLC, the clinical activity and safety profile of durvalumab was consistent with that of other anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 agents. Responses were recorded in all cohorts; the proportion of patients with EGFR–/ALK– NSCLC (cohorts 2 and 3) achieving a response was higher than the proportion with EGFR+/ALK+ NSCLC (cohort 1) achieving a response. The clinical activity of durvalumab in patients with EGFR+ NSCLC with ≥25% of tumour cells expressing PD-L1 was encouraging, and further investigation of durvalumab in patients with EGFR+/ALK+ NSCLC is warranted.
AstraZeneca.
PDF
