EGFR is a tyrosine kinase that participates in the regulation of cellular homeostasis. Following ligand binding, EGFR stimulates downstream cell signaling cascades that influence cell proliferation, ...apoptosis, migration, survival and complex processes, including angiogenesis and tumorigenesis. EGFR has been strongly implicated in the biology of human epithelial malignancies, with therapeutic applications in cancers of the colon, head and neck, lung, and pancreas. Accordingly, targeting EGFR has been intensely pursued, with the development of a series of promising molecular inhibitors for use in clinical oncology. As is common in cancer therapy, challenges with respect to treatment resistance emerge over time. This situation is certainly true of EGFR inhibitor therapies, where intrinsic and acquired resistance is now well recognized. In this Review, we provide a brief overview regarding the biology of EGFR, preclinical and clinical development of EGFR inhibitors, and molecular mechanisms that underlie the development of treatment resistance. A greater understanding of the mechanisms that lead to EGFR resistance may provide valuable insights to help design new strategies that will enhance the impact of this promising class of inhibitors for the treatment of cancer.
The development of immunotherapy in oncology builds upon many years of scientific investigation into the cellular mechanics underlying interactions between tumor cells and immune cell populations. ...The past decade has brought an accelerating pace to the clinical investigation of new immunotherapy agents, particularly in the setting of metastatic disease. The integration of immunotherapy into phase 3 clinical trial design has lagged in settings of advanced locoregional disease, where combination with radiation therapy may be critical. Yet, such may be the settings where immunotherapies have their greatest potential to affect patient survival and achieve curative outcomes. In this review, we discuss the interaction of radiation with the immune system and the potential to augment antitumor immunity through combined-modality approaches that integrate radiation and immunotherapies. The dynamics of cellular and tumor response to radiation offer unique opportunities for beneficial interplay with immunotherapy that may go unrecognized with conventional screening and monotherapy clinical testing of novel pharmaceutical agents. Using immune checkpoint blockade as a primary example, we discuss recent preclinical and clinical studies that illustrate the potential synergy of such therapies in combination with radiation, and we highlight the potential clinical value of such interactions. For various immunotherapy agents, their greatest clinical effect may rest in combination with radiation, and efforts to facilitate systematic investigation of this approach are highly warranted.
To evaluate the effect of radiation dose escalation on overall survival (OS) for patients with nonmetastatic esophageal cancer treated with concurrent radiation and chemotherapy.
Patients diagnosed ...with stage I to III esophageal cancer treated from 2004 to 2012 were identified from the National Cancer Data Base. Patients who received concurrent radiation and chemotherapy with radiation doses of ≥50 Gy and did not undergo surgery were included. OS was compared using Cox proportional hazards regression and propensity score matching.
A total of 6854 patients were included; 3821 (55.7%) received 50 to 50.4 Gy and 3033 (44.3%) received doses >50.4 Gy. Univariate analysis revealed no significant difference in OS between patients receiving 50 to 50.4 Gy and those receiving >50.4 Gy (P=.53). The dose analysis, binned as 50 to 50.4, 51 to 54, 55 to 60, and >60 Gy, revealed no appreciable difference in OS within any group compared with 50 to 50.4 Gy. Subgroup analyses investigating the effect of dose escalation by histologic type and in the setting of intensity modulated radiation therapy also failed to reveal a benefit. Propensity score matching confirmed the absence of a statistically significant difference in OS among the dose levels. The factors associated with improved OS on multivariable analysis included female sex, lower Charlson-Deyo comorbidity score, private insurance, cervical/upper esophagus location, squamous cell histologic type, lower T stage, and node-negative status (P<.01 for all analyses).
In this large national cohort, dose escalation >50.4 Gy did not result in improved OS among patients with stage I to III esophageal cancer treated with definitive concurrent radiation and chemotherapy. These data suggest that despite advanced contemporary treatment techniques, OS for patients with esophageal cancer remains unaltered by escalation of radiation dose >50.4 Gy, consistent with the results of the INT-0123 trial. Furthermore, these data highlight that many radiation oncologists have not embraced the concept that dose escalation does not improve OS. Although local control, not investigated in the present study, might benefit from dose escalation, novel therapies are needed to improve the OS of patients with esophageal cancer.
Patients with human papillomavirus (HPV+)-associated head and neck cancer (HNC) show significantly improved survival outcome compared with those with HPV-negative (HPV-) tumors. Published data ...examining this difference offers conflicting results to date. We systematically investigated the radiation sensitivity of all available validated HPV+ HNC cell lines and a series of HPV- HNC cell lines using in vitro and in vivo techniques. HPV+ HNCs exhibited greater intrinsic radiation sensitivity (average SF2 HPV-: 0.59 vs. HPV+: 0.22; P < 0.0001), corresponding with a prolonged G2-M cell-cycle arrest and increased apoptosis following radiation exposure (percent change 0% vs. 85%; P = 0.002). A genome-wide microarray was used to compare gene expression 24 hours following radiation between HPV+ and HPV- cell lines. Multiple genes in TP53 pathway were upregulated in HPV+ cells (Z score 4.90), including a 4.6-fold increase in TP53 (P < 0.0001). Using immortalized human tonsillar epithelial (HTE) cells, increased radiation sensitivity was seen in cell expressing HPV-16 E6 despite the effect of E6 to degrade p53. This suggested that low levels of normally functioning p53 in HPV+ HNC cells could be activated by radiation, leading to cell death. Consistent with this, more complete knockdown of TP53 by siRNA resulted in radiation resistance. These results provide clear evidence, and a supporting mechanism, for increased radiation sensitivity in HPV+ HNC relative to HPV- HNC. This issue is under active investigation in a series of clinical trials attempting to de-escalate radiation (and chemotherapy) in selected patients with HPV+ HNC in light of their favorable overall survival outcome.
To assess the results of a multi-institutional study of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for early oropharyngeal cancer.
Patients with oropharyngeal carcinoma Stage T1-2, N0-1, M0 ...requiring treatment of the bilateral neck were eligible. Chemotherapy was not permitted. Prescribed planning target volumes (PTVs) doses to primary tumor and involved nodes was 66 Gy at 2.2 Gy/fraction over 6 weeks. Subclinical PTVs received simultaneously 54-60 Gy at 1.8-2.0 Gy/fraction. Participating institutions were preapproved for IMRT, and quality assurance review was performed by the Image-Guided Therapy Center.
69 patients were accrued from 14 institutions. At median follow-up for surviving patients (2.8 years), the 2-year estimated local-regional failure (LRF) rate was 9%. 2/4 patients (50%) with major underdose deviations had LRF compared with 3/49 (6%) without such deviations (p = 0.04). All cases of LRF, metastasis, or second primary cancer occurred among patients who were current/former smokers, and none among patients who never smoked. Maximal late toxicities Grade >or=2 were skin 12%, mucosa 24%, salivary 67%, esophagus 19%, osteoradionecrosis 6%. Longer follow-up revealed reduced late toxicity in all categories. Xerostomia Grade >or=2 was observed in 55% of patients at 6 months but reduced to 25% and 16% at 12 and 24 months, respectively. In contrast, salivary output did not recover over time.
Moderately accelerated hypofractionatd IMRT without chemotherapy for early oropharyngeal cancer is feasible, achieving high tumor control rates and reduced salivary toxicity compared with similar patients in previous Radiation Therapy Oncology Group studies. Major target underdose deviations were associated with higher LRF rate.
Although p16 protein expression, a surrogate marker of oncogenic human papillomavirus (HPV) infection, is recognized as a prognostic marker in oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC), its ...prevalence and significance have not been well established in cancer of the oral cavity, hypopharynx, or larynx, collectively referred as non-OPSCC, where HPV infection is less common than in the oropharynx.
p16 expression and high-risk HPV status in non-OPSCCs from RTOG 0129, 0234, and 0522 studies were determined by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and in situ hybridization (ISH). Hazard ratios from Cox models were expressed as positive or negative, stratified by trial, and adjusted for clinical characteristics.
p16 expression was positive in 14.1% (12 of 85), 24.2% (23 of 95), and 19.0% (27 of 142) and HPV ISH was positive in 6.5% (six of 93), 14.6% (15 of 103), and 6.9% (seven of 101) of non-OPSCCs from RTOG 0129, 0234, and 0522 studies, respectively. Hazard ratios for p16 expression were 0.63 (95% CI, 0.42 to 0.95; P = .03) and 0.56 (95% CI, 0.35 to 0.89; P = .01) for progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS), respectively. Comparing OPSCC and non-OPSCC, patients with p16-positive OPSCC have better PFS and OS than patients with p16-positive non-OPSCC, but patients with p16-negative OPSCC and non-OPSCC have similar outcomes.
Similar to results in patients with OPSCC, patients with p16-negative non-OPSCC have worse outcomes than patients with p16-positive non-OPSCC, and HPV may also have a role in outcome in a subset of non-OPSCC. However, further development of a p16 IHC scoring system in non-OPSCC and improvement of HPV detection methods are warranted before broad application in the clinical setting.
Summary Background Previous results from our phase 3 randomised trial showed that adding cetuximab to primary radiotherapy increased overall survival in patients with locoregionally advanced ...squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck (LASCCHN) at 3 years. Here we report the 5-year survival data, and investigate the relation between cetuximab-induced rash and survival. Methods Patients with LASCCHN of the oropharynx, hypopharynx, or larynx with measurable disease were randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio to receive either comprehensive head and neck radiotherapy alone for 6–7 weeks or radiotherapy plus weekly doses of cetuximab: 400 mg/m2 initial dose, followed by seven weekly doses at 250 mg/m2 . Randomisation was done with an adaptive minimisation technique to balance assignments across stratification factors of Karnofsky performance score, T stage, N stage, and radiation fractionation. The trial was un-blinded. The primary endpoint was locoregional control, with a secondary endpoint of survival. Following discussions with the US Food and Drug Administration, the dataset was locked, except for queries to the sites about overall survival, before our previous report in 2006, so that an independent review could be done. Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. Following completion of treatment, patients underwent physical examination and radiographic imaging every 4 months for 2 years, and then every 6 months thereafter. The trial is registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00004227. Findings Patients were randomly assigned to receive radiotherapy with (n=211) or without (n=213) cetuximab, and all patients were followed for survival. Updated median overall survival for patients treated with cetuximab and radiotherapy was 49·0 months (95% CI 32·8–69·5) versus 29·3 months (20·6–41·4) in the radiotherapy-alone group (hazard ratio HR 0·73, 95% CI 0·56–0·95; p=0·018). 5-year overall survival was 45·6% in the cetuximab-plus-radiotherapy group and 36·4% in the radiotherapy-alone group. Additionally, for the patients treated with cetuximab, overall survival was significantly improved in those who experienced an acneiform rash of at least grade 2 severity compared with patients with no rash or grade 1 rash (HR 0·49, 0·34–0·72; p=0·002). Interpretation For patients with LASCCHN, cetuximab plus radiotherapy significantly improves overall survival at 5 years compared with radiotherapy alone, confirming cetuximab plus radiotherapy as an important treatment option in this group of patients. Cetuximab-treated patients with prominent cetuximab-induced rash (grade 2 or above) have better survival than patients with no or grade 1 rash. Funding ImClone Systems, Merck KGaA, and Bristol-Myers Squibb.
Treatment of advanced locoregional head and neck cancer with high-dose radiotherapy plus cetuximab was superior to radiotherapy alone in improving local control and overall survival.
Treatment of ...advanced locoregional head and neck cancer with high-dose radiotherapy plus cetuximab was superior to radiotherapy alone in improving local control and overall survival.
The treatment of locoregionally advanced squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck (hereafter called head and neck cancer) has evolved gradually from surgery as the mainstay of treatment to radiotherapy as the principal treatment.
1
–
6
More recently, additional benefit has been obtained with altered-fractionation radiotherapy (i.e., accelerated fractionation or hyperfractionated radiotherapy) and with radiotherapy combined with chemotherapy (chemoradiotherapy).
5
–
11
The value of chemoradiotherapy is, however, counterbalanced by increased and often prohibitive toxicity, particularly among patients with coexisting medical conditions and decreased performance status.
6
,
12
The epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), a member of the ErbB family of receptor tyrosine kinases, . . .
Patients with human papillomavirus (HPV)-positive oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma have high survival when treated with radiotherapy plus cisplatin. Whether replacement of cisplatin with ...cetuximab—an antibody against the epidermal growth factor receptor—can preserve high survival and reduce treatment toxicity is unknown. We investigated whether cetuximab would maintain a high proportion of patient survival and reduce acute and late toxicity.
RTOG 1016 was a randomised, multicentre, non-inferiority trial at 182 health-care centres in the USA and Canada. Eligibility criteria included histologically confirmed HPV-positive oropharyngeal carcinoma; American Joint Committee on Cancer 7th edition clinical categories T1–T2, N2a–N3 M0 or T3–T4, N0–N3 M0; Zubrod performance status 0 or 1; age at least 18 years; and adequate bone marrow, hepatic, and renal function. We randomly assigned patients (1:1) to receive either radiotherapy plus cetuximab or radiotherapy plus cisplatin. Randomisation was balanced by using randomly permuted blocks, and patients were stratified by T category (T1–T2 vs T3–T4), N category (N0–N2a vs N2b–N3), Zubrod performance status (0 vs 1), and tobacco smoking history (≤10 pack-years vs >10 pack-years). Patients were assigned to receive either intravenous cetuximab at a loading dose of 400 mg/m2 5–7 days before radiotherapy initiation, followed by cetuximab 250 mg/m2 weekly for seven doses (total 2150 mg/m2), or cisplatin 100 mg/m2 on days 1 and 22 of radiotherapy (total 200 mg/m2). All patients received accelerated intensity-modulated radiotherapy delivered at 70 Gy in 35 fractions over 6 weeks at six fractions per week (with two fractions given on one day, at least 6 h apart). The primary endpoint was overall survival, defined as time from randomisation to death from any cause, with non-inferiority margin 1·45. Primary analysis was based on the modified intention-to-treat approach, whereby all patients meeting eligibility criteria are included. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01302834.
Between June 9, 2011, and July 31, 2014, 987 patients were enrolled, of whom 849 were randomly assigned to receive radiotherapy plus cetuximab (n=425) or radiotherapy plus cisplatin (n=424). 399 patients assigned to receive cetuximab and 406 patients assigned to receive cisplatin were subsequently eligible. After median follow-up duration of 4·5 years, radiotherapy plus cetuximab did not meet the non-inferiority criteria for overall survival (hazard ratio HR 1·45, one-sided 95% upper CI 1·94; p=0·5056 for non-inferiority; one-sided log-rank p=0·0163). Estimated 5-year overall survival was 77·9% (95% CI 73·4–82·5) in the cetuximab group versus 84·6% (80·6–88·6) in the cisplatin group. Progression-free survival was significantly lower in the cetuximab group compared with the cisplatin group (HR 1·72, 95% CI 1·29–2·29; p=0·0002; 5-year progression-free survival 67·3%, 95% CI 62·4–72·2 vs 78·4%, 73·8–83·0), and locoregional failure was significantly higher in the cetuximab group compared with the cisplatin group (HR 2·05, 95% CI 1·35–3·10; 5-year proportions 17·3%, 95% CI 13·7–21·4 vs 9·9%, 6·9–13·6). Proportions of acute moderate to severe toxicity (77·4%, 95% CI 73·0–81·5 vs 81·7%, 77·5–85·3; p=0·1586) and late moderate to severe toxicity (16·5%, 95% CI 12·9–20·7 vs 20·4%, 16·4–24·8; p=0·1904) were similar between the cetuximab and cisplatin groups.
For patients with HPV-positive oropharyngeal carcinoma, radiotherapy plus cetuximab showed inferior overall survival and progression-free survival compared with radiotherapy plus cisplatin. Radiotherapy plus cisplatin is the standard of care for eligible patients with HPV-positive oropharyngeal carcinoma.
National Cancer Institute USA, Eli Lilly, and The Oral Cancer Foundation.
PDF
