Phase III randomized trial of sunitinib malate (SU11248) versus interferon-alfa (IFN-α) as first-line systemic therapy for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC)

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. LBA3-LBA3 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. J. Motzer ◽  
T. E. Hutson ◽  
P. Tomczak ◽  
M. D. Michaelson ◽  
R. M. Bukowski ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Objective Response Rate ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Phase Ii Trials ◽  
First Line ◽  
Independent Review

LBA3 Background: Two multicenter phase II trials of 2nd line monotherapy with sunitinib (SU11248) in patients (pts) with mRCC showed a response rate of approximately 40% (JCO 2006;24:16–24; Proc ASCO 23, 380s). This international, randomized phase III trial compared the efficacy and safety of sunitinib to IFN-α in treatment naïve pts with mRCC. Methods: Untreated pts with clear-cell mRCC were randomized 1:1 to receive sunitinib (6-week cycles: 50 mg orally once daily for 4 weeks, followed by 2 weeks off) or IFN-α (6-week cycles: subcutaneous injection 9 MU given three times weekly). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included objective response rate, overall survival, and adverse events. Based on a planned sample size of 690 patients, the trial was designed to have 90% power to detect a 35% improvement in median PFS from 20 weeks to 27 weeks (4.6 months to 6.2 months; 2-sided unstratified log-rank test; significance level 0.05). Results of a planned analysis on the primary endpoint, PFS, are presented in this report. Results: From Aug 2004 to Oct 2005, 750 patients were randomized: 375 to sunitinib, 375 to IFN-α. Baseline characteristics were well balanced, and included pooled median age = 60 and prior nephrectomy = 90%. Median PFS assessed by third-party independent review was 47.3 weeks (95% CI 40.9, not yet reached) for sunitinib vs. 24.9 weeks (95% CI 21.9, 37.1) for IFN-α [hazard ratio 0.394 (95% CI 0.297, 0.521) (p < 0.000001)]. The objective response rate by third-party independent review was 24.8% (95% CI 19.7, 30.5) for sunitinib vs. 4.9% (95% CI 2.7, 8.1) for IFN-α (p < 0.000001). The objective response rate by investigator assessment was 35.7% (95% CI 30.9, 40.8) for sunitinib vs. 8.8% (95% CI 6.1, 12.1) for IFN-α (p < 0.000001). 632 pts (85%) are alive, with 49 deaths on sunitinib arm and 65 deaths on IFN-α arm. 8% withdrew from the study due to adverse event on sunitinib arm vs. 13% on IFN-α arm. Conclusions: These results demonstrate a statistically significant improvement in PFS and objective response rate for sunitinib over IFN-α in first-line treatment of pts with mRCC. [Table: see text]

BEYOND: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Multicenter, Phase III Study of First-Line Carboplatin/Paclitaxel Plus Bevacizumab or Placebo in Chinese Patients With Advanced or Recurrent Nonsquamous Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (19) ◽  
pp. 2197-2204 ◽  
Author(s):  
Caicun Zhou ◽  
Yi-Long Wu ◽  
Gongyan Chen ◽  
Xiaoqing Liu ◽  
Yunzhong Zhu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Objective Response Rate ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Chinese Patients ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
First Line

Purpose The phase III BEYOND trial was undertaken to confirm in a Chinese patient population the efficacy seen with first-line bevacizumab plus platinum doublet chemotherapy in globally conducted studies. Patients and Methods Patients age ≥ 18 years with locally advanced, metastatic, or recurrent advanced nonsquamous non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) were randomly assigned to receive carboplatin (area under the curve, 6) intravenously and paclitaxel (175 mg/m2) intravenously (CP) on day 1 of each 3-week cycle, for ≤ six cycles, plus placebo (Pl+CP) or bevacizumab (B+CP) 15 mg/kg intravenously, on day 1 of each cycle, until progression, unacceptable toxicity, or death. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary end points were objective response rate, overall survival, exploratory biomarkers, safety. Results A total of 276 patients were randomly assigned, 138 to each arm. PFS was prolonged with B+CP versus Pl+CP (median, 9.2 v 6.5 months, respectively; hazard ratio [HR], 0.40; 95% CI, 0.29 to 0.54; P < .001). Objective response rate was improved with B+CP compared with Pl+CP (54% v 26%, respectively). Overall survival was also prolonged with B+CP compared with Pl+CP (median, 24.3 v 17.7 months, respectively; HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.93; P = .0154). Median PFS was 12.4 months with B+CP and 7.9 months with Pl+CP (HR, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.12 to 0.63) in EGFR mutation–positive tumors and 8.3 and 5.6 months, respectively (HR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.21 to 0.53), in wild-type tumors. Safety was similar to previous studies of B+CP in NSCLC; no new safety signals were observed. Conclusion The addition to bevacizumab to carboplatin/paclitaxel was well tolerated and resulted in a clinically meaningful treatment benefit in Chinese patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC.

A randomized phase III study comparing carboplatin with nab-paclitaxel versus docetaxel for elderly patients with squamous-cell lung cancer: Capital study.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9031-9031
Author(s):  
Yoichiro Hamamoto ◽  
Yoshihito Kogure ◽  
Akiko Kada ◽  
Hiroya Hashimoto ◽  
Shinji Atagi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Elderly Patients ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Objective Response Rate ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Phase Iii

9031 Background: Cytotoxic monotherapy is one of the standard treatments for elderly patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Carboplatin plus nab-paclitaxel demonstrated significantly higher objective response rate (ORR) than carboplatin plus paclitaxel in patients with squamous histology and could improve overall survival (OS) in patients aged ≥70 years. Here, we compared carboplatin plus nab-paclitaxel with docetaxel in elderly patients with squamous NSCLC. Methods: The CAPITAL study is a multicenter, open-label, phase 3, randomized trial at 92 institutions in Japan. Eligible patients had advanced squamous NSCLC with no prior systemic chemotherapy, aged ≥70 years, and had an ECOG performance status of 0 or 1. Patients were randomized 1:1 to docetaxel 60 mg/m2 (D arm) or carboplatin AUC 6 mg/mL/min plus nab-paclitaxel 100 mg/m2 weekly (nab-PC arm) for each 21-day cycle. The primary endpoint was OS. This trial is registered with the UMIN Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN000019843) and the Japan Registry of Clinical Trials (jRCTs041180110). Results: Between December 2015 and August 2020, 196 patients were randomly assigned to the two treatment arms (D arm, n=98; nab-PC arm, n=98). The median follow-up and age were 11.5 months and 76 years (range: 70–88 years), respectively, and 87% of the patients were male. After the planned interim analysis, the independent data monitoring committee confirmed that the study met the primary endpoint of improved OS in August 2020, and this report represents the final analysis. The nab-PC arm showed significant superiority in OS versus the D arm (hazard ratio [HR], 0.52; 90% CI, 0.38-0.70; median, 16.9 vs. 10.9 months; p<0.001). There were also significant improvements in progression-free survival (median, 5.8 vs. 4.0 months; HR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.30-0.58; p<0.001) and objective response rate (66.3 vs. 28.0 %; p<0.001) in the nab-PC arm versus the D arm. The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were leukopenia (46.3 %), neutropenia (63.2 %), and anemia (38.9 %) in the nab-PC arm, and leukopenia (56.7 %), neutropenia (77.3 %), and febrile neutropenia (17.5 %) in the D arm. As notable adverse events, grade ≥2 sensory peripheral neuropathy was observed in 15 (15.8%) and 1 (1.0%) patient in the nab-PC and D arms, respectively. Moreover, serious treatment-related adverse events and treatment-related deaths occurred in 14 (14.7%) and 12 (12.4%) patients and in two and one patient in the nab-PC and D arms, respectively. Conclusions: The nab-PC arm had a significantly improved OS than the D arm among elderly patients with squamous NSCLC. Carboplatin plus nab-paclitaxel became a new standard treatment for these patients. Clinical trial information: UMIN000019843.

The importance of sequence in rescheduling bevacizumab and chemotherapy administration in the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal carcinoma (mCRC).

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 617-617
Author(s):  
Leonidas Chelis ◽  
Nikolaos Xenidis ◽  
Kiriakos Amarantidis ◽  
Nikolaos Diamantopoulos ◽  
Anastasios L. Boutis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Objective Response Rate ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Fluid Pressure ◽  
Treatment Schedule ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Treatment

617 Background: One of the proposed mechanisms of action for bevacizumab is by reducing the interstitial fluid pressure (IFP) allowing an increased penetration and uptake of chemotherapy agents in tumors. Clinical and laboratory data suggest that the decrease of IFP occurs after a few days of bevacizumab administration and intratumoral delivery of chemotherapy increase when bevacizumab precedes chemotherapy. We hypothesized that altering the schedule of BEV/FOLFOX regimen would improve the efficacy of the regimen and increase objective response rate. Methods: Patients (pts) with mCRC or locally advanced colorectal cancer, with ECOG PS 0-2 were eligible. The treatment schedule was Bevacizumab 5mg/Kg on day 1, standard FOLFOX-4 regimen on days 8-9 at cycles repeated every 14 days. Prior 5-FU/oxaliplatin adjuvant treatment was allowed. The pts were treated for 6 months or until reaching a plateau of response. Standard RECIST v1.1 response evaluation criteria were used. Primary endpoint of the study was the percentage of objective response rate, PR+CR (ORR), secondary end points were PFS, OS and toxicity. A Simon two step, minimax, statistical design was used: the minimum accepted ORR was 45% (p0) and the estimated ORR was 65% (p1). Results: Thirty (n=30) pts were enrolled. The median age was 69.5 years, the performance status was 0 (40%), 1 (40%), 2 (20%), the median follow up was 20.75 months and the K-RAS status was wild type for 63.5% and mutant for 36.5%. Seven pts (23.3%) had received prior adjuvant chemotherapy. Five pts had convertible metastatic disease. Four CR (13.33%), 18 PR (60%), 7 SD (23.33%), and one PD (3.3%) were observed for a total ORR of 73.3% and disease control rate (CR+PR+SD) of 96.7%. Four out of five (80%) pts with convertible disease achieved a R0 resection. The PFS was 12.8 months and OS has not been reached yet. One patient experienced a grade 4 event (febrile neutropenia). The study met its primary endpoint and therefore is considered positive. Conclusions: Delivering bevacizumab before chemotherapy in the first-line treatment of mCRC represents a very effective and promising schedule which warrants further investigation in randomized clinical trials.

Tailored immunotherapy approach with nivolumab in advanced transitional cell carcinoma (TITAN-TCC).

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 446-446
Author(s):  
Marc-Oliver Grimm ◽  
Bernd Schmitz-Dräger ◽  
Uwe Zimmermann ◽  
Barbara Grün ◽  
Gustavo Bruno Baretton ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Transitional Cell ◽  
Added Value ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
First Line ◽  
Third Line

446 Background: Several PD-1 immune-checkpoint inhibitors including Nivolumab (Nivo) are approved in urothelial cancer. Recently, in the front line setting, improved activity of combined PD-L1 and CTLA4 immune-checkpoint inhibition has been reported and a phase III trial with Nivolumab + Ipilimumab (Nivo+Ipi) is ongoing. Here we report a response-based tailored approach starting treatment with Nivo monotherapy using Nivo+Ipi as immunotherapeutic “boost”. Methods: Between July 2017 and April 2019 86 patients were enrolled and treated according to protocol version 3 (cohort 1). Patients started with Nivo 240 mg Q2W induction. After 4 dosings and tumor assessment at week 8 (i) responders (PR/CR) to Nivo monotherapy continued with maintenance while (ii) patients with stable (SD) or progressive disease (PD) received 2 cycles Nivo3+Ipi1 followed by another 2 cycles Nivo1+Ipi3 if not responding. Median follow-up is 8.7 months. The primary endpoint is confirmed investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST1.1. Secondary endpoints include activity of Nivo monotherapy at week 8, remission rate with Nivo+Ipi “boosts”, safety, overall survival and quality of life. Results: Of the patients 42, 39 and 5 were first, second and third line, respectively. Median age was 67 years (range 45-84), 61 patients (71 %) were male and 25 female. ORR with Nivo monotherapy at first assessment (week 8) was 29 % and 23 % in first and second/third line, respectively. Of the patients 41 received Nivo+Ipi “boosts” after week 8 while 12 received later “boosts”. Best overall response (BOR) rate with Nivo induction ± Nivo+Ipi “boosts” was 48 % and 27 % in first and second/third line, respectively. In first line 7/17 (41 %) patients receiving Nivo+Ipi after week 8 had an improved response compared to 2/24 (8.3 %) in second/third line. Of the patients who continued with Nivo maintenance after week 8 and received later “boosts” 2/12 (17 %) had a PR and 2/12 (17 %) improved to SD. Treatment-related AEs will be presented. Conclusions: TITAN–TCC explores a response-driven use of Nivo+Ipi as an immunotherapeutic “boost”. In first line, this significantly improved ORR compared to the expected response rate of Nivo monotherapy, providing further evidence to the added value of Ipi in combination with Nivo. Further follow-up is ongoing to characterize duration and depth of response. Clinical trial information: NCT03219775 . Research Sponsor: Bristol-Myers Squibb[Table: see text]

Effects of adding necitumumab to first-line chemotherapy in patients with stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer: Meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (6) ◽  
pp. 1331-1342
Author(s):  
Irena Ilic ◽  
Sandra Sipetic ◽  
Jovan Grujicic ◽  
Milena Ilic
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Objective Response Rate ◽  
Advanced Nsclc ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival

Introduction Almost half of patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are diagnosed at an advanced stage. Our aim was to assess the effects of adding necitumumab to chemotherapy in patients with stage IV NSCLC. Material and methods A comprehensive literature search was performed according to pre-specified inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data on overall survival, progression-free survival, objective response rate and adverse events were extracted. A meta-analysis was performed to obtain pooled hazard ratios (HR) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) for time-to-event data and pooled odds ratio (OR) with 95% CI for dichotomous outcomes. Results The meta-analysis included four randomized clinical trials with 2074 patients. The pooled results showed significant improvement for overall survival (HR = 0.87 (95% CI 0.79–0.95), p = 0.004) when necitumumab was added to chemotherapy in patients with advanced NSCLC. No statistically significant improvement was noted for progression-free survival and objective response rate (HR = 0.83 (95% CI 0.69–1.01), p = 0.06 and OR = 1.46 (95% CI 0.90–2.38), p = 0.13, respectively). Subgroup analysis showed that in patients with non-squamous NSCLC, there was no benefit in overall survival and objective response rate. Patients with advanced NSCLC who received necitumumab were at the highest odds of developing a skin rash (OR = 14.50 (95% CI 3.16–66.43), p = 0.0006) and hypomagnesaemia (OR = 2.77 (95% CI 2.23–3.45), p < 0.00001), while the OR for any grade ≥3 adverse event was 1.55 (95% CI 1.28–1.87, p < 0.00001). Conclusions The addition of necitumumab to standard chemotherapy in a first-line setting in patients with stage IV NSCLC results in a statistically significant improvement in overall survival, while the results were not significant for progression-free survival and objective response rate.

CETUFTIRI, a new combination of UFT with leucovorin (LV), irinotecan, and cetuximab as first-line treatment for patients (pts) with unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): Preliminary results from a multicenter phase II trial

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4087-4087 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Bennouna ◽  
R. Faroux ◽  
E. François ◽  
C. Ligeza ◽  
C. El Hannani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase Ii ◽  
Objective Response Rate ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Phase Ii Study ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
New Combination ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Egfr Expression ◽  
First Line Treatment

4087 Background: A phase II study (ASCO 2004) established that the combination of UFT (tegafur-uracil) with LV and irinotecan (TEGAFIRI) could be safely administered to pts with unresectable mCRC, with an objective response rate (ORR) of 34% and a median time to progression (TTP) of 5.7 months. We initiated CETUFTIRI, a phase II study, to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of cetuximab added to TEGAFIRI in chemonaïve pts with unresectable mCRC. Methods: Patients in this single-stage study were aged =18 years, with histologically or cytologically confirmed, bidimensionally measurable mCRC, ECOG performance status 0 or 1, and adequate bone marrow, renal, and hepatic function. EGFR expression was not an inclusion criterion. Treatment consisted of UFT 250 mg/m2/day d1–14, LV 90 mg/day d1–14, and irinotecan 250 mg/m2 d1 every 3 weeks, plus cetuximab 400 mg/m2 week 1 then 250 mg/m2 weekly thereafter. The primary endpoint was ORR and the planned sample size was 61 pts. The study is now closed to accrual. Results: To date, 48 patients are evaluable for safety and 31 are evaluable for efficacy. Patient characteristics (n=48): median age 65 years (range 45–84 years); ECOG PS 0/1: 73/27%; male 65%; tumor sites: colon 69%; rectum 17%; junction 14%; liver metastasis 83%; lung metastasis 46%; other 27%. Adverse events per patient (n=48) after a total of 230 cycles were: grade G3 mucositis 10%; G3/4 neutropenia 10%; G3 nausea/vomiting 8%; G3 asthenia 6%; febrile neutropenia 6%; G3 hypokalemia 6%; G3/4 anemia 4%; G3 diarrhea 2%; acne-like rash G1/2 50% (G3 4%); infusion- related reaction to cetuximab 6%. Two of 31 evaluable pts had a complete response and 11 had a partial response, for an ORR of 42%; 5 pts had stable disease (16%) and 11 pts had progressive disease (35.5%). An independent radiologist review is planned for all 61 pts included up to December 2006. Conclusions: The CETUFTIRI combination seems to have an acceptable toxicity profile with an attractive objective response rate in the first-line treatment of pts with mCRC. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Combined analysis of two phase II trials of imatinib in advanced dermatofibrosarcoma protuberans (DFSP)

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 10520-10520 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Schuetze ◽  
P. Rutkowski ◽  
M. M. Van Glabbeke ◽  
C. Rankin ◽  
B. P. Rubin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase Ii ◽  
Objective Response Rate ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Chromosome 17 ◽  
Low Grade ◽  
Time To Progression ◽  
Phase Ii Trials ◽  
Two Phase

10520 Background: DFSP is an infiltrative, low-grade, dermal tumor with propensity to recur locally and occasionally metastasize. Translocation between COL1A1 on chromosome 17 and PDGFB on chromosome 22, which results in transcriptional upregulation of PDGFB, is characteristic of DFSP. Autocrine/paracrine PDGFB-mediated activation of PDGFRB drives DFSP proliferation. Two distinct phase II trials of imatinib in patients (pts) with locally advanced or metastatic DFSP were conducted, 1 in North America (SWOG) with confirmed objective response rate and 1 in Europe (EORTC) with 14 week progression-free rate as primary end-points. Methods: Pts with locally advanced or metastatic DFSP were eligible. In the EORTC trial confirmation of t(17;22) by FISH was prospectively required for participation, imatinib was started at 400mg bid, surgery was undertaken after 14 weeks if feasible and response was assessed at 14 weeks. Full accrual was to be 44 pts in one step. In the SWOG trial confirmation of t(17;22) by RT-PCR was performed after enrollment, imatinib was started at 400mg daily and response was assessed every 8 weeks. Full accrual was to be 40 pts in 2 steps. Results: 16 pts were enrolled in EORTC and 8 pts enrolled in SWOG trial. The studies were closed early because of slow accrual and regulatory approval of imatinib in DFSP. Pts age ranged from 24 to 70 yrs, DFSP was located on head/neck, trunk and extremity in 7, 11 and 6 pts, respectively, ranged in size from 1.2–49 cm and was classic, pigmented and fibrosarcomatous DFSP in 13, 1 and 7 pts, respectively. One patient did not have DFSP on central review, lacked t(17;22) and thus was ineligible. Metastases were present in 7 pts involving lung in 6 pts. 11 pts (46%) had partial response, 9 pts had stable disease and 4 pts had progressive disease as best response. Median time to progression was 1.7 yrs. Response and progression-free at 1 yr rates were similar between studies. Imatinib was stopped in 11 pts for progression, 1 pt for toxicity, 2 pts resected free of gross disease and 1 pt withdrew. Conclusions: Imatinib is active in DFSP harboring t(17;22) with an objective response rate approaching 50% and is active in fibrosarcomatous DFSP. Response rates and time to progression did not appear to differ between pts taking 400 mg daily versus 400 mg bid. [Table: see text]

FOLFIRI-3/bevacizumab induction, then capecitabine/bevacizumab maintenance as front-line strategy for metastatic colorectal cancer: A phase II trial.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e14007-e14007
Author(s):  
Stefano Chong Hun Kim
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Predictive Factors ◽  
Objective Response Rate ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Front Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Treatment

e14007 Background: Bevacizumab with FOLFIRI or FOLFOX regimen is the standard of care in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). As second line regimen after FOLFOX, FOLFIRI-3 has showed a significantly better PFS in comparison with other irinotecan-based regimen. We therefore evaluated the safety, efficacy and possible predictive factors for FOLFIRI-3 in combination with bevacizumab as initial treatment for mCRC. Secondarily, we evaluated the feasibility of Capecitabine-Bevacizumab maintenance. Methods: We conducted a phase II, multicentric trial of FOLFIRI-3 regimen (irinotecan 100mg/m2 day 1, LV 200mg/m2 day 1, 5-FU bolus 400 mg/m2 day 1 followed by a 36-h 5-FU continuous infusion 2400 mg/m2, irinotecan 100mg/m2 day 3) with bevacizumab (5mg/kg day 1) repeated every 2 weeks, as first-line treatment in mCRC for 6 months, followed by maintenance treatment with bevacizumab (7.5 mg/kg day 1) and capecitabine (1000 mg/m2 day 1 to 14), repeated every 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints were PFS, overall survival (OS), and biologic analysis of potential predictive factors of response to treatment. Results: From October 2007 to July 2009, 61 patients were enrolled for treatment. The ORR was 66.7% (8.3% of complete response and 58.3% of partial response). Stable disease was observed in 25% of patients (disease control rate of 91.7%). PFS was 12 months, and OS was 33 months. Forty patients entered to maintenance phase. Favorable tolerance profile was observed. Median PFS was 14 months, and OS was 36 months. Its efficacy was maintained in patients recently exposed to oxaliplatin. Conclusions: As front-line regimen in mCRC, FOLFIRI3-bevacizumab is maybe the best among irinotecan-5FU-bevacizumab based regimens to obtain objective response rate. PFS and OS are high but it can be secondary to high complete resection rate in our trial. In recently oxaliplatin-exposed patients, FOLFIRI3-bevacizumab regimen should be considered as first line treatment. Capecitabine-bevacizumab maintenance is clearly feasible and its encouraging result should be validated in a large phase III trial.

ASPIRATION: Phase II study of continued erlotinib beyond RECIST progression in Asian patients (pts) with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS7614-TPS7614 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keunchil Park ◽  
Chun-Ming Tsai ◽  
Myung-ju Ahn ◽  
Chong-Jen Yu ◽  
Sang-We Kim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase Ii ◽  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Egfr Mutation ◽  
Kinase Inhibitor ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Egfr Mutations ◽  
First Line ◽  
Life Threatening ◽  
Pre Treatment

TPS7614 Background: First-line erlotinib (an EGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitor) significantly increased progression-free survival (PFS) vs chemotherapy in phase III trials of pts with EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC. Discontinuation of erlotinib on RECIST disease progression (PD) may lead to rapid disease flare-up; continued erlotinib beyond RECIST PD may extend clinical benefit by slowing progression of this life-threatening disease. We describe ASPIRATION, a large, Asian, multicenter, single-arm, open-label, phase II trial (NCT01310036), which will increase understanding of first-line erlotinib and erlotinib continuation beyond RECIST PD in pts with EGFR-mutated NSCLC. Methods: Pts (n=204) ≥18 yrs with stage IV/recurrent NSCLC, ≥1 measurable lesion (≥10mm), ECOG performance status (PS) 0-2 and positive EGFR mutation status established by local pathology laboratory (that underwent voluntarily QA/QC) are eligible. All pts receive erlotinib 150mg/day. Tumor response is evaluated using RECIST (v1.1). The primary endpoint is PFS. At investigator's discretion, pts may continue on erlotinib beyond RECIST PD, e.g. if they have slow PD (>6 months of partial response/stable disease), asymptomatic minimal PD, or new brain metastasis controlled locally. Pts should not continue erlotinib if they have extracranial PD with symptoms; rapid PD and/or worsening of PS; or life-threatening complications. Pts continuing erlotinib who present with second RECIST PD will discontinue. Secondary endpoints include objective response rate, disease control rate, overall survival, and safety. For the exploratory biomarker study, pre-treatment tumor tissue blocks are collected; remaining tissue (after EGFR mutation testing for eligibility) will be analyzed centrally to study the association of biomarkers and clinical outcomes. Pre-treatment and post-treatment plasma and serum samples will be obtained at various time points for biomarker assays, including EGFR mutations and other candidate NSCLC biomarkers. Recruitment began in Apr 2011; the estimated final data collection for the primary endpoint is Dec 2014.

Axitinib versus sorafenib as first‑line therapy in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC).

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. LBA348-LBA348 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas E. Hutson ◽  
Jorge Gallardo ◽  
Vladmir Lesovoy ◽  
Salman Al-Shukri ◽  
Viktor Stus ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Survival Data ◽  
Group Performance ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy

LBA348 Background: In the phase III AXIS trial, second-line therapy with axitinib resulted in significantly longer progression-free survival (PFS) versus sorafenib for mRCC. We conducted a multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase III trial to compare PFS of axitinib vs sorafenib as first-line therapy. Methods: Patients with untreated, measurable (RECIST v1.0), clear‑cell mRCC and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (PS) 0 or 1 were randomized 2:1 to axitinib 5 mg twice daily (BID) or sorafenib 400 mg BID. Randomization was stratified by PS. Primary endpoint was PFS per independent radiology committee. The study had 90% power to detect a 78% PFS improvement from 5.5 mo with sorafenib to 9.8 mo with axitinib, corresponding to a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.561 (overall 1-sided α=0.025). Results: Patients (N=288) were mainly from Eastern Europe (51%), Asia (25%), North America (14%), or South America (10%).Patient baseline characteristics for axitinib (n=192) vs sorafenib (n=96) included: median age, 58y vs 58y; male, 70% vs 77%; white, 71% vs 69%; favorable risk, 49% vs 55%; PS 0, 57% vs 57%; nephrectomy, 85% vs 90%. Median (m) PFS was 10.1 vs 6.5 mo with axitinib vs sorafenib (HR adjusted for PS, 0.767; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.559–1.053; 1‑sided P=0.0377). In patients with PS 0 and 1, respectively, mPFS with axitinib vs sorafenib was 13.7 vs 6.6 mo (HR, 0.644; 95% CI, 0.419–0.991; 1‑sided P=0.022) and 6.5 vs 6.4 mo (HR, 0.931; 95% CI, 0.585–1.482; 1‑sided P=0.38). Objective response rates (ORRs) with axitinib vs sorafenib were 32.3% vs 14.6% (1‑sided P=0.0006 adjusted for PS). Overall survival data were not mature. All-grade all‑causality adverse events (≥20%) with axitinib vs sorafenib were diarrhea (50% vs 40%), hypertension (49% vs 29%), weight decreased (37% vs 24%), fatigue (33% vs 26%), decreased appetite (29% vs 19%), palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (26% vs 39%), dysphonia (23% vs 10%), asthenia (21% vs 16%), and hypothyroidism (21% vs 7%). Conclusions: The study did not achieve its primary endpoint statistically, but axitinib demonstrated numerically longer mPFS and significantly higher ORR vs sorafenib, with an acceptable safety profile, as first-line therapy for mRCC. Clinical trial information: NCT00920816.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document