Background: This pivotal phase III trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of palonosetron in preventing acute and delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) following highly emetogenic ...chemotherapy (HEC). Patients and methods: Patients were randomized to a single intravenous dose of palonosetron 0.25 mg or 0.75 mg, or ondansetron 32 mg prior to HEC. Dexamethasone pre-treatment (with stratification) was used at investigator discretion. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of patients with complete response (CR) during the first 24 h post-chemotherapy (acute phase). Results: In the intent-to-treat analysis (n = 667), palonosetron 0.25 mg and 0.75 mg were at least as effective as ondansetron in preventing acute CINV (59.2%, 65.5%, and 57.0% CR rates, respectively); CR rates were slightly higher with palonosetron than ondansetron during the delayed (24–120 h) and overall (0–120 h) phases. Two thirds of patients (n = 447) received concomitant dexamethasone. Patients pre-treated with palonosetron 0.25 mg plus dexamethasone had significantly higher CR rates than those receiving ondansetron plus dexamethasone during the delayed (42.0% versus 28.6%) and overall (40.7% versus 25.2%) phases. Palonosetron and ondansetron were well tolerated. Conclusions: Single-dose palonosetron was as effective as ondansetron in preventing acute CINV following HEC, and with dexamethasone pre-treatment, its effectiveness was significantly increased over ondansetron throughout the 5-day post-chemotherapy period.
This double-blind, phase 3 study assessed the efficacy and safety of ganitumab plus gemcitabine as first-line treatment of metastatic pancreatic cancer. The study was stopped after a preplanned ...futility analysis indicated a positive outcome was unlikely at primary analysis. Ganitumab plus gemcitabine had manageable toxicity but did not improve OS versus gemcitabine alone in unselected patients.
This double-blind, phase 3 study assessed the efficacy and safety of ganitumab combined with gemcitabine as first-line treatment of metastatic pancreatic cancer.
Patients with previously untreated metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma were randomly assigned 2 : 2 : 1 to receive intravenous gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 (days 1, 8, and 15 of each 28-day cycle) plus placebo, ganitumab 12 mg/kg, or ganitumab 20 mg/kg (days 1 and 15 of each cycle). The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), safety, and efficacy by levels of circulating biomarkers.
Overall, 322 patients were randomly assigned to placebo, 318 to ganitumab 12 mg/kg, and 160 to ganitumab 20 mg/kg. The study was stopped based on results from a preplanned futility analysis; the final results are reported. Median OS was 7.2 months 95% confidence interval (CI), 6.3-8.2 in the placebo arm, 7.0 months (95% CI, 6.2-8.5) in the ganitumab 12-mg/kg arm hazard ratio (HR), 1.00; 95% CI, 0.82-1.21; P = 0.494, and 7.1 months (95% CI, 6.4-8.5) in the ganitumab 20-mg/kg arm (HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.76-1.23; P = 0.397). Median PFS was 3.7, 3.6 (HR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.84-1.20; P = 0.520), and 3.7 months (HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.77–1.22; P = 0.403), respectively. No unexpected toxicity was observed with ganitumab plus gemcitabine. The circulating biomarkers assessed insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1), IGF-binding protein-2, and -3 were not associated with a treatment effect on OS or PFS by ganitumab.
Ganitumab combined with gemcitabine had manageable toxicity but did not improve OS, compared with gemcitabine alone in unselected patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer.
ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01231347.
•This ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline provides key recommendations and algorithms for the management of patients with EBC.•It covers diagnosis, staging, risk assessment, treatment, follow-up, ...specific situations and the patient perspective.•The author group is multidisciplinary, with experts representing a range of institutions worldwide.•Recommendations, including ESMO-MCBS and ESCAT scores where applicable, are based on available evidence and expert opinion.•Patient communication and shared decision making are covered with respect to diagnostic procedures and treatment options.
Integrins are involved in tumour progression and metastasis, and differentially expressed on colorectal cancer (CRC) cells. Abituzumab (EMD 525797), a humanised monoclonal antibody targeting integrin ...αν heterodimers, has demonstrated preclinical activity. This trial was designed to assess the tolerability of different doses of abituzumab in combination with cetuximab and irinotecan (phase I) and explore the efficacy and tolerability of the combination versus that of cetuximab and irinotecan in patients with metastatic CRC (mCRC) (phase II part).
Eligible patients had KRAS (exon 2) wild-type mCRC and had received prior oxaliplatin-containing therapy. The trial comprised an initial safety run-in using abituzumab doses up to 1000mg combined with a standard of care (SoC: cetuximab plus irinotecan) and a phase II part in which patients were randomised 1 : 1 : 1 to receive abituzumab 500mg (arm A) or 1000mg (arm B) every 2 weeks combined with SoC, or SoC alone (arm C). The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points included overall survival (OS), response rate (RR) and tolerability. Associations between tumour integrin expression and outcomes were also assessed.
Phase I showed that abituzumab doses up to 1000mg were well tolerated in combination with SoC. Seventy-three (arm A), 71 (arm B) and 72 (arm C) patients were randomised to the phase II part. Baseline characteristics were balanced. PFS was similar in the three arms: arm A versus SoC, hazard ratio (HR) 1.13 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78–1.64; arm B versus SoC, HR 1.11 (95% CI 0.77–1.61). RRs were also similar. A trend toward improved OS was observed: arm A versus SoC, HR 0.83 (95% CI 0.54–1.28); arm B versus SoC, HR 0.80 (95% CI 0.52–1.25). Grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events were observed in 72%, 78% and 67% of patients. High tumour integrin αvβ6 expression was associated with longer OS in arms A HR 0.55 (0.30–1.00) and B HR 0.41 (0.21–0.81) than in arm C.
The primary PFS end point was not met, although predefined exploratory biomarker analyses identified subgroups of patients in whom abituzumab may have benefit. The tolerability of abituzumab combined with cetuximab and irinotecan was acceptable. Further study is warranted.
NCT01008475
Background: OVA-301 is a large randomized trial that showed superiority of trabectedin plus pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) over PLD alone in relapsed ovarian cancer. The optimal management of ...patients with partially platinum-sensitive relapse 6–12 months platinum-free interval (PFI) is unclear.
Patients and methods: Within OVA-301, we therefore now report on the outcomes for the 214 cases in this subgroup.
Results: Trabectedin/PLD resulted in a 35% risk reduction of disease progression (DP) or death hazard ratio (HR) = 0.65, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.45–0.92; P = 0.0152; median progression-free survival (PFS) 7.4 versus 5.5 months, and a significant 41% decrease in the risk of death (HR = 0.59; 95% CI, 0.43–0.82; P = 0.0015; median survival 23.0 versus 17.1 months). The safety of trabectedin/PLD in this subset mimicked that of the overall population. Similar proportions of patients received subsequent therapy in each arm (76% versus 77%), although patients in the trabectedin/PLD arm had a slightly lower proportion of further platinum (49% versus 55%). Importantly, patients in the trabectedin/PLD arm survived significantly longer after subsequent platinum (HR = 0.63; P = 0.0357; median 13.3 versus 9.8 months).
Conclusion: This hypothesis-generating analysis demonstrates that superior benefits with trabectedin/PLD in terms of PFS and survival in the overall population appear particularly enhanced in patients with partially sensitive disease (PFI 6–12 months).
PDF
