Summary Background Patients with muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder have poor survival after cystectomy. The EORTC 30994 trial aimed to compare immediate versus deferred ...cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy after radical cystectomy in patients with pT3–pT4 or N+ M0 urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. Methods This intergroup, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial recruited patients from hospitals across Europe and Canada. Eligible patients had histologically proven urothelial carcinoma of the bladder, pT3–pT4 disease or node positive (pN1–3) M0 disease after radical cystectomy and bilateral lymphadenectomy, with no evidence of any microscopic residual disease. Within 90 days of cystectomy, patients were centrally randomly assigned (1:1) by minimisation to either immediate adjuvant chemotherapy (four cycles of gemcitabine plus cisplatin, high-dose methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin high-dose MVAC, or MVAC) or six cycles of deferred chemotherapy at relapse, with stratification for institution, pT category, and lymph node status according to the number of nodes dissected. Neither patients nor investigators were masked. Overall survival was the primary endpoint; all analyses were by intention to treat. The trial was closed after recruitment of 284 of the planned 660 patients. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00028756. Findings From April 29, 2002, to Aug 14, 2008, 284 patients were randomly assigned (141 to immediate treatment and 143 to deferred treatment), and followed up until the data cutoff of Aug 21, 2013. After a median follow-up of 7·0 years (IQR 5·2–8·7), 66 (47%) of 141 patients in the immediate treatment group had died compared with 82 (57%) of 143 in the deferred treatment group. No significant improvement in overall survival was noted with immediate treatment when compared with deferred treatment (adjusted HR 0·78, 95% CI 0·56–1·08; p=0·13). Immediate treatment significantly prolonged progression-free survival compared with deferred treatment (HR 0·54, 95% CI 0·4–0·73, p<0·0001), with 5-year progression-free survival of 47·6% (95% CI 38·8–55·9) in the immediate treatment group and 31·8% (24·2–39·6) in the deferred treatment group. Grade 3–4 myelosuppression was reported in 33 (26%) of 128 patients who received treatment in the immediate chemotherapy group versus 24 (35%) of 68 patients who received treatment in the deferred chemotherapy group, neutropenia occurred in 49 (38%) versus 36 (53%) patients, respectively, and thrombocytopenia in 36 (28%) versus 26 (38%). Two patients died due to toxicity, one in each group. Interpretation Our data did not show a significant improvement in overall survival with immediate versus deferred chemotherapy after radical cystectomy and bilateral lymphadenectomy for patients with muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma. However, the trial is limited in power, and it is possible that some subgroups of patients might still benefit from immediate chemotherapy. An updated individual patient data meta-analysis and biomarker research are needed to further elucidate the potential for survival benefit in subgroups of patients. Funding Lilly, Canadian Cancer Society Research.
Summary Background Early risk-stratified chemotherapy is a standard treatment for breast, colorectal, and lung cancers, but not for high-risk localised prostate cancer. Combined docetaxel and ...estramustine improves survival in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer. We assessed the effects of combined docetaxel and estramustine on relapse in patients with high-risk localised prostate cancer. Methods We did this randomised phase 3 trial at 26 hospitals in France. We enrolled patients with treatment-naive prostate cancer and at least one risk factor (ie, stage T3–T4 disease, Gleason score of ≥8, prostate-specific antigen concentration >20 ng/mL, or pathological node-positive). All patients underwent a staging pelvic lymph node dissection. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either androgen deprivation therapy (ADT; goserelin 10·8 mg every 3 months for 3 years) plus four cycles of docetaxel on day 2 at a dose of 70 mg/m2 and estramustine 10 mg/kg per day on days 1–5, every 3 weeks, or ADT only. The randomisation was done centrally by computer, stratified by risk factor. Local treatment was administered at 3 months. Neither patients nor investigators were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was relapse-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Follow-up for other endpoints is ongoing. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00055731. Findings We randomly assigned 207 patients to the ADT plus docetaxel and estramustine group and 206 to the ADT only group. Median follow-up was 8·8 years (IQR 8·1–9·7). 88 (43%) of 207 patients in the ADT plus docetaxel and estramustine group had an event (relapse or death) versus 111 (54%) of 206 in the ADT only group. 8-year relapse-free survival was 62% (95% CI 55–69) in the ADT plus docetaxel and estramustine group versus 50% (44–57) in the ADT only group (adjusted hazard ratio HR 0·71, 95% CI 0·54–0·94, p=0·017). Of patients who were treated with radiotherapy and had data available, 31 (21%) of 151 in the ADT plus docetaxel and estramustine group versus 26 (18%) of 143 in the ADT only group reported a grade 2 or higher long-term side-effect (p=0·61). We recorded no excess second cancers (26 13% of 207 vs 22 11% of 206; p=0·57), and there were no treatment-related deaths. Interpretation Docetaxel-based chemotherapy improves relapse-free survival in patients with high-risk localised prostate cancer. Longer follow-up is needed to assess whether this benefit translates into improved metastasis-free survival and overall survival. Funding Ligue Contre le Cancer, Sanofi-Aventis, AstraZeneca, Institut National du Cancer.
Abstract Background The role of chemotherapy in metastatic non castrate prostate cancer (mNCPC) is debated. Survival benefits of docetaxel (D) added to androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) were shown ...in the CHAARTED trial in patients with metastatic high-volume disease (HVD). Objective To assess the impact of metastatic burden and to update overall survival (OS) data of the GETUG-AFU15 study. Design, setting, and participants Randomized phase 3 trial of ADT plus D versus ADT alone in 385 mNCPC patients; median follow-up of 7 yr. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis Primary end point was OS. Secondary end points were biochemical progression-free survival (bPFS) and radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS). Retrospective analysis was by tumor volume. Results and limitations After a median follow-up of 83.9 mo, median OS in the overall population was 62.1 mo (95% confidence interval CI, 49.5–73.7) and 48.6 mo (95% CI, 40.9–60.6) for ADT plus D and ADT arms, respectively (hazard ratio HR: 0.88 95% CI, 0.68–1.14; p = 0.3). Median OS in ADT plus D and ADT arms, respectively, was for HVD patients: 39.8 mo (95% CI, 28.0–53.4) versus 35.1 mo (95% CI, 29.9–43.6) (HR: 0.78 95% CI, 0.56–1.09; p = 0.14), for low-volume disease (LVD) patients; median was not reached (NR; 95% CI, 69.5–NR) and 83.4 mo (95% CI, 61.8–NR) (HR: 1.02 95% CI, 0.67–1.55; p = 0.9). For upfront metastatic patients, OS was 52.6 mo (95% CI, 43.3–66.8) and 41.5 mo (95% CI, 36.3–54.5), respectively (HR: 0.93 95% CI, 0.69–1.25; p = 0.6). The bPFS (HR: 0.73 95% CI, 0.56–0.94; p = 0.014) and rPFS (HR: 0.75 95% CI, 0.58–0.97; p = 0.030) were significantly longer in the ADT plus D arm. Limitations included the retrospective analysis of metastatic extent and the lack of statistical power to detect a significant difference in subgroups. Conclusions The post hoc analyses of the GETUG-AFU15 study demonstrated a nonsignificant 20% reduction in the risk of death in the HVD subgroup. Patients with LVD had no survival improvement with early D. Patient summary In this study, docetaxel added to castration did not improve survival in patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, partly due to methodological issues. However, early chemotherapy should be discussed with all patients, given the data of three randomized trials including GETUG-AFU15.
There is no strong and reliable predictive biomarker in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) for EGFR inhibitors. We aimed to identify predictive and pharmacodynamic biomarkers of efficacy ...of afatinib, a pan-HER tyrosine kinase inhibitor, in a window-of-opportunity trial (NCT01415674). Multi-omics analyses were carried out on pre-treatment biopsy and surgical specimen for biological assessment of afatinib activity. Sixty-one treatment-naïve and operable HNSCC patients were randomised to afatinib 40 mg/day for 21-28 days versus no treatment. Afatinib produced a high rate of metabolic response. Responders had a higher expression of pERK1/2 (P = 0.02) and lower expressions of pHER4 (P = 0.03) and pRB1 (P = 0.002) in pre-treatment biopsy compared to non-responders. At the cellular level, responders displayed an enrichment of tumor-infiltrating B cells under afatinib (P = 0.02). At the molecular level, NF-kappa B signaling was over-represented among upregulated genes in non-responders (P < 0.001; FDR = 0.01). Although exploratory, phosphoproteomics-based biomarkers deserve further investigations as predictors of afatinib efficacy.
Durvalumab is a programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitor with clinical activity in advanced urothelial cancer (AUC)
. AUC is characterized by several recurrent targetable genomic alterations
. ...This study ( NCT02546661 , BISCAY) combined durvalumab with relevant targeted therapies in biomarker-selected chemotherapy-refractory AUC populations including: (1) fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitors in tumors with FGFR DNA alterations (FGFRm); (2) pharmacological inhibitor of the enzyme poly-ADP ribose polymerase (PARP) in tumors with and without DNA homologous recombination repair deficiency (HRRm); and (3) TORC1/2 inhibitors in tumors with DNA alteration to the mTOR/PI3K pathway
.This trial adopted a new, biomarker-driven, multiarm adaptive design. Safety, efficacy and relevant biomarkers were evaluated. Overall, 391 patients were screened of whom 135 were allocated to one of six study arms. Response rates (RRs) ranged 9-36% across the study arms, which did not meet efficacy criteria for further development. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were similar in the combination arms and durvalumab monotherapy arm. Biomarker analysis showed a correlation between circulating plasma-based DNA (ctDNA) and tissue for FGFRm. Sequential circulating tumor DNA analysis showed that changes to FGFRm correlated with clinical outcome. Our data support the clinical activity of FGFR inhibition and durvalumab monotherapy but do not show increased activity for any of the combinations. These findings question the targeted/immune therapy approach in AUC.
Complete remission (CR) is uncommon during treatment for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), but it may occur in some patients. It remains a matter of ...debate whether therapy should be continued after CR.
A multicenter, retrospective analysis of a series of patients with mRCC who obtained CR during treatment with TKIs (sunitinib or sorafenib), either alone or with local treatment (surgery, radiotherapy, or radiofrequency ablation), was performed.
CR was identified in 64 patients; 36 patients had received TKI treatment alone and 28 had also received local treatment. Most patients had clear cell histology (60 of 64 patients), and all had undergone previous nephrectomy. The majority of patients were favorable or intermediate risk; however, three patients were poor risk. Most patients developed CR during sunitinib treatment (59 of 64 patients). Among the 36 patients who achieved CR with TKI alone, eight continued TKI treatment after CR, whereas 28 stopped treatment. Seventeen patients who stopped treatment (61%) are still in CR, with a median follow-up of 255 days. Among the 28 patients in CR after TKI plus local treatment, 25 patients stopped treatment, and 12 of these patients (48%) are still in CR, with a median follow-up of 322 days.
CR can occur after TKI treatment alone or when combined with local treatment. CR was observed at every metastatic site and in every prognostic group.
Nivolumab-ipilimumab demonstrated a survival benefit over sunitinib in first-line setting for metastatic renal cell carcinomas (mRCCs) and is becoming a new standard of care for naïve patients with ...intermediate or poor risk prognosis (International mRCC Database Consortium). The efficacy of subsequent vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) after nivolumab-ipilimumab failure remains unclear.
Medical records of mRCC patients treated with nivolumab-ipilimumab, who received subsequent TKI, as part of Checkmate 214 study were reviewed in 13 institutions. Baseline characteristics, outcome data including progression-free survival (PFS), response, overall survival (OS) and toxicities were retrospectively collected.
Overall 33 patients received subsequent TKI after nivolumab-ipilimumab failure. Median follow-up from start of subsequent TKI is 22 months (19–NR). Best response was assessed in 30 patients: 12 partial responses (36%), 13 stable diseases (39%) and five progressive diseases (15%). Median PFS from start of TKI was 8 months 5–13. Median PFS with first-generation (sunitinib/pazopanib) and second-generation TKI (axitinib/cabozantinib) was 8 months 5–16 and 7 months (5–NA), respectively. PFS in second line was significantly longer in patients with a long first-line duration of response to the double immune checkpoint blockade (≥6 months) with 8 versus 5 months for short responder (<6 months) (p = 0.03). OS rate was 54% at 12 months. Toxicity was as expected: 42% developed at least one toxicity grade ≥3.
This is the first report of outcomes with TKI, after first-line nivolumab-ipilimumab failure. Median PFS suggests a sustained benefit of TKI and supports trials investigating the optimal sequence.
•First report of tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) activity in patients after nivolumab-ipilimumab failure in mRCC.•Median TKIs progression free survival is 8 months (95% confidence interval: 5–13).•No difference was observed between first and second generation of TKI.•75% of patients had a clinical benefit with 36% of partial response.•Investigating the optimal sequence for each patient must be the next priority.
Mature survival data and evaluation of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) as a prognostic biomarker from the Treatment Approaches in Renal Cancer Global Evaluation Trial (TARGET) study in ...patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) are reported.
Nine hundred three previously treated patients were randomly assigned to receive sorafenib versus placebo. On demonstration of progression-free survival (PFS) benefit with sorafenib, patients assigned to placebo were offered sorafenib. Overall survival (OS) was determined at two planned interim analyses and one final analysis, with a secondary OS analysis conducted by censoring placebo patients who crossed over to sorafenib. The relationships between baseline VEGF level and prognosis and efficacy were evaluated.
The final OS of patients receiving sorafenib was comparable with that of patients receiving placebo (17.8 v 15.2 months, respectively; hazard ratio HR = 0.88; P = .146); however, when post-cross-over placebo survival data were censored, the difference became significant (17.8 v 14.3 months, respectively; HR = 0.78; P = .029). Adverse events at 16 months after cross over were similar to those previously reported. Baseline VEGF levels correlated with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (P < .0001), Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center score (P < .0001), and PFS and OS in univariate (PFS, P = .0013; OS, P = .0009) and multivariate (PFS, P = .0231; OS, P = .0416) analyses of placebo patients and with short OS by multivariate analysis of patients receiving sorafenib (P = .0145). Both high-VEGF (P < .01) and low-VEGF (P < .01) groups benefited from sorafenib.
Although an OS benefit was not seen on a primary intent-to-treat analysis, results of a secondary OS analysis censoring placebo patients demonstrated a survival advantage for those receiving sorafenib, suggesting an important cross-over effect. VEGF levels are prognostic for PFS and OS in RCC. The results of TARGET establish the efficacy and safety of sorafenib in advanced RCC.
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of the epidermal growth factor receptor-directed monoclonal antibody cetuximab administered as a single agent in patients with recurrent and/or metastatic squamous ...cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) who experience disease progression on platinum therapy.
An open-label multicenter study in which patients with disease progression on two to six cycles of platinum therapy received single-agent cetuximab (initial dose 400 mg/m2 followed by subsequent weekly doses of 250 mg/m2) for > or = 6 weeks (single-agent phase). Patients who experienced disease progression could receive salvage therapy with cetuximab plus platinum (combination-therapy phase). From June 2001 to December 2002, 103 patients were enrolled and treated with cetuximab, 53 of whom subsequently received combination therapy.
In the single-agent phase, response rate was 13%, disease control rate (complete response/partial response/stable disease) was 46%, and median time to progression (TTP) was 70 days. During the combination-therapy phase, the objective response rate was zero, disease control rate was 26%, and TTP was 50 days. Median overall survival was 178 days. Treatment was well tolerated. The most common cetuximab-related adverse events in the single-agent phase were skin reactions, particularly rash (49% of patients, mainly grade 1 or 2). There was one treatment-related death due to an infusion-related reaction.
Single-agent cetuximab was active and generally well tolerated in the treatment of recurrent and/or metastatic SCCHN that progressed on platinum therapy. Response was comparable to that seen with cetuximab plus platinum combination regimens in the same setting.
An open-label, phase II study to evaluate progression-free survival (PFS), overall best response, adverse events (AEs), and patient-reported outcomes with sorafenib versus interferon alfa-2a ...(IFN-alpha-2a) in patients with untreated, advanced renal cancer.
A total of 189 patients were randomly assigned to oral sorafenib 400 mg twice daily or to subcutaneous IFN-alpha-2a 9 million U three times weekly (period 1). Sorafenib patients who progressed were dose-escalated to 600 mg twice daily; IFN-alpha-2a patients who progressed were switched to sorafenib 400 mg twice daily (period 2).
In period 1 PFS was similar for sorafenib-treated (n = 97; 5.7 months) and IFN-alpha-2a-treated patients (n = 92; 5.6 months); more sorafenib-treated patients had tumor shrinkage (68.2% v 39.0%). Common drug-related AEs (Grades > or = 3) for sorafenib were hand-foot skin reaction (11.3%), diarrhea (6.2%), and rash/desquamation (6.2%); for IFN-alpha-2a, these were fatigue (10.0%), nausea (3.3%), flu-like syndrome (2.2%), and anorexia (2.2%). Sorafenib-treated patients reported fewer symptoms, better quality of life (QOL), and greater treatment satisfaction. In period 2, 41.9% of patients who received sorafenib 600 mg twice daily (n = 43) experienced tumor reduction (median PFS, 3.6 months). After the switch to sorafenib 400 mg twice daily, tumors were reduced in 76.2% of 50 patients (median PFS, 5.3 months). AEs were mostly grade 1 to 2; no increase in AEs of grades > or = 3 occurred after sorafenib dose escalation.
In this study, sorafenib resulted in similar PFS as IFN-alpha-2a in patients with untreated RCC. However, sorafenib-treated patients experienced greater rates of tumor size reduction, better QOL, and improved tolerability. Both dose escalation of sorafenib after progression and a switch to sorafenib after progression on IFN-alpha-2a resulted in clinical benefit.
PDF
