Results of a Phase III, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Study of Sorafenib in Combination With Carboplatin and Paclitaxel As Second-Line Treatment in Patients With Unresectable Stage III or Stage IV Melanoma

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (17) ◽  
pp. 2823-2830 ◽  
Author(s):  
Axel Hauschild ◽  
Sanjiv S. Agarwala ◽  
Uwe Trefzer ◽  
David Hogg ◽  
Caroline Robert ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Stage Iv ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Advanced Melanoma ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
End Points

PurposeThis phase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of sorafenib with carboplatin and paclitaxel (CP) in patients with advanced melanoma who had progressed on a dacarbazine- or temozolomide-containing regimen.Patients and MethodsA total of 270 patients were randomly assigned to receive intravenous paclitaxel 225 mg/m2plus intravenous carboplatin at area under curve 6 (AUC 6) on day 1 of a 21-day cycle followed by either placebo (n = 135) or oral sorafenib 400 mg (n = 135) twice daily on days 2 to 19. The primary efficacy end point was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary and tertiary end points included overall survival and incidence of best response, respectively.ResultsThe median PFS was 17.9 weeks for the placebo plus CP arm and 17.4 weeks for the sorafenib plus CP arm (hazard ratio, 0.91; 99% CI, 0.63 to 1.31; two-sided log-rank test P = .49). Response rate was 11% with placebo versus 12% with sorafenib. Dermatologic events, grade 3 thrombocytopenia, diarrhea, and fatigue were more common in patients treated with sorafenib plus CP versus placebo plus CP.ConclusionIn this study, the addition of sorafenib to CP did not improve any of the end points over placebo plus CP and cannot be recommended in the second-line setting for patients with advanced melanoma. Both regimens had clinically acceptable toxicity profiles with no unexpected adverse events. A trial of similar design for the first-line treatment of patients with advanced melanoma (intergroup trial E2603) is currently ongoing.

REVEL: A randomized, double-blind, phase III study of docetaxel (DOC) and ramucirumab (RAM; IMC-1121B) versus DOC and placebo (PL) in the second-line treatment of stage IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) following disease progression after one prior platinum-based therapy.

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. LBA8006-LBA8006 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maurice Perol ◽  
Tudor-Eliade Ciuleanu ◽  
Oscar Arrieta ◽  
Kumar Prabhash ◽  
Konstantinos N. Syrigos ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Disease Progression ◽  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Pulmonary Hemorrhage ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Double Blind

LBA8006^ Background: RAM is a human IgG1 monoclonal antibody that targets the extracellular domain of VEGFR-2. The REVEL study evaluated the efficacy and safety of RAM+DOC vs. PL+DOC (DOC) in patients (pts) with stage IV nonsquamous (NSQ) and squamous (SQ) NSCLC after platinum-based therapy. Methods: Pts with NSQ and SQ stage IV NSCLC were randomized 1:1 (stratified by sex, region, ECOG PS, and prior maintenance therapy) to receive DOC 75 mg/m2 in combination with either RAM 10 mg/kg or PL on day 1 of a 21-day cycle until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or death. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary efficacy endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), and objective response rate (ORR). Results: Between Dec 2010 and Feb 2013, 1,253 pts (26.2% SQ) were randomized (RAM+DOC: 628; DOC: 625). Pt characteristics were balanced between arms. ORR was 22.9% for RAM+DOC and 13.6% for DOC (P<0.001). The hazard ratio (HR) for PFS was 0.762 (P<0.0001); median PFS was 4.5 months (m) for RAM+DOC vs. 3.0m for DOC. REVEL met its primary endpoint; the OS HR was 0.857 (95% CI 0.751, 0.98; P=0.0235); median OS was 10.5m for RAM+DOC vs. 9.1m for DOC. OS was longer for RAM+DOC in most pt subgroups, including SQ and NSQ histology. Grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) occurring in >5% of pts on RAM+DOC were neutropenia (34.9% vs. 28.0%), febrile neutropenia (15.9% vs. 10.0%), fatigue (11.3% vs. 8.1%), leukopenia (8.5% vs. 7.6%), hypertension (5.4% vs. 1.9%), and pneumonia (5.1% vs. 5.8%). Grade 5 AEs were comparable between arms (5.4% vs. 5.8%), as was pulmonary hemorrhage (any grade; all pts: 2.1% vs. 1.6%; SQ pts: 3.8% vs. 2.4%). Conclusions: REVEL demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in ORR, PFS, and OS for RAM+DOC vs DOC in NSCLC pts with stage IV NSCLC as second-line treatment after platinum-based therapy. Benefits were similar in NSQ and SQ pts, and no unexpected AEs were identified. Clinical trial information: NCT01168973.

An international, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind phase III study (MONET1) of motesanib plus carboplatin/paclitaxel (C/P) in patients with advanced nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. LBA7512-LBA7512 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Scagliotti ◽  
I. Vynnychenko ◽  
Y. Ichinose ◽  
K. Park ◽  
K. Kubota ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cox Model ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
High Rate ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Nonsquamous Nsclc

LBA7512 Background: This study evaluated whether motesanib (a selective oral inhibitor of VEGFR 1, 2 and 3; PDGFR and Kit) plus C/P improved overall survival (OS) compared with placebo + C/P in patients (pts) with nonsquamous NSCLC and in a subset of pts with adenocarcinoma. Methods: Pts had stage IIIB/IV or recurrent nonsquamous NSCLC and no prior systemic therapy for advanced NSCLC. The study initially enrolled all histologies but was amended to exclude pts with squamous NSCLC owing to a high rate of hemoptysis. Pts were randomized 1:1 to receive up to six 3-wk cycles of C (AUC 6 mg/mL·min) and P (200 mg/m2) with either motesanib 125 mg QD (Arm A) or placebo QD (Arm B) orally continuously. The primary endpoint was OS; secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), adverse events (AEs), objective response rate (ORR) and association between placental growth factor (PLGF) change and OS. OS was evaluated using a stratified Cox model and 2-sided log-rank test (α=0.03 for nonsquamous pts and α=0.02 for adenocarcinoma pts). Results: 1090 pts with nonsquamous NSCLC were randomized (Arm A/B, n=541/549); 890 had adenocarcinoma (n=448/442). 61% were men; median age was 60 years (range 21–87); 83% had stage IV disease. At the time of analysis, 753 pts had died (608 pts with adenocarcinoma). Median follow-up was 10.6 mo. OS was not significantly improved in Arm A compared with Arm B (Table). In Arm A, PLGF analysis did not show an association with OS. The incidence of grade ≥3 AEs in Arms A/B was 73/59%. Grade ≥3 AEs occurring more frequently in Arm A than B included neutropenia (22/15%), diarrhea (9/1%), hypertension (7/1%) and cholecystitis (3/0%). The incidence of grade 5 AEs was 14/9% in Arms A/B. Conclusions: In pts with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC, treatment with motesanib + C/P did not significantly improve OS compared with C/P alone. [Table: see text]

ENGOT-EN6/NSGO-RUBY: A phase III, randomized, double-blind, multicenter study of dostarlimab + carboplatin-paclitaxel versus placebo + carboplatin-paclitaxel in recurrent or primary advanced endometrial cancer (EC).

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS6107-TPS6107
Author(s):  
Mansoor Raza Mirza ◽  
Robert L. Coleman ◽  
Lars Christian Hanker ◽  
Brian M. Slomovitz ◽  
Giorgio Valabrega ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Objective Response ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Disease Status ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Stage Iii ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Primary Stage ◽  
Patient Reported

TPS6107 Background: Carboplatin-paclitaxel is considered standard systemic anticancer therapy for recurrent or advanced EC for which surgery and/or radiation are not curative. Dostarlimab (TSR-042) is an anti-programmed cell death (PD)-1 humanized monoclonal antibody that has demonstrated antitumor activity and an acceptable safety profile in patients (pts) with recurrent or advanced EC in the GARNET trial. The RUBY trial was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of dostarlimab in combination with carboplatin-paclitaxel in recurrent or primary advanced EC compared with carboplatin-paclitaxel alone. Methods: This is a global, randomized, double-blind, multicenter, placebo-controlled study. Eligible pts must have first recurrent or primary stage III or stage IV EC with a low potential for cure by radiation therapy or surgery alone or in combination. Pts with carcinosarcoma are eligible for enrollment. 470 pts will be enrolled from approximately 160 sites in the ENGOT countries, United States, and Canada. Stratification factors are microsatellite instability (MSI) status (MSI-high [MSI-H] or microsatellite stable [MSS]), prior external pelvic radiotherapy (yes or no), and disease status (recurrent, primary stage III, or primary stage IV). Pts will be randomized 1:1 to receive combination dostarlimab 500 mg or placebo + carboplatin AUC 5 + paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 every 3 weeks for 6 cycles followed by dostarlimab 1000 mg or placebo monotherapy every 6 weeks for up to 3 years in the absence of progressive disease, death, unacceptable toxicity, or patient/physician decision to withdraw from the study. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival (PFS) as assessed by the investigator in the all-comers population and the MSI-H population per RECIST version 1.1. Secondary efficacy endpoints are PFS assessed by blinded independent central review per RECIST version 1.1, overall survival, objective response rate, duration of response, disease control rate, safety and tolerability, and patient-reported outcomes. Clinical trial information: NCT03981796.

RAISE: A randomized, double-blind, multicenter phase III study of irinotecan, folinic acid, and 5-fluorouracil (FOLFIRI) plus ramucirumab (RAM) or placebo (PBO) in patients (pts) with metastatic colorectal carcinoma (CRC) progressive during or following first-line combination therapy with bevacizumab (bev), oxaliplatin (ox), and a fluoropyrimidine (fp).

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 512-512 ◽  
Author(s):  
Josep Tabernero ◽  
Allen Lee Cohn ◽  
Radka Obermannova ◽  
Gyorgy Bodoky ◽  
Rocio Garcia-Carbonero ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Combination Therapy ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Ecog Ps

512 Background: Angiogenesis is an important therapeutic target in CRC; VEGF plays a key role in angiogenesis. RAM is a human IgG1 monoclonal antibody that targets the extracellular domain of VEGFR-2. The RAISE study evaluated the efficacy and safety of adding RAM to standard second-line treatment FOLFIRI. Methods: Eligible pts with mCRC who progressed on or after first-line combination therapy with bev, ox, and fp, had an ECOG PS of 0 or 1, and adequate organ function were randomized 1:1 (stratified by region, KRAS mutation status, and time to progressive disease [PD] after beginning first-line treatment) to receive RAM (8 mg/kg IV) plus FOLFIRI or PBO plus FOLFIRI every 2 weeks until PD, unacceptable toxicity, or death. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and safety. Planned sample size of 1,050 pts ensured 85% power to demonstrate statistical significance at an overall two-sided alpha of 0.05, assuming a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.8. Results: Between Dec 2010 and Aug 2013, 1,072 eligible pts were randomized (RAM 536; PBO 536). Baseline pt characteristics were similar between treatment arms. The OS HR was 0.84 (95% CI: 0.73, 0.98; log-rank p=0.0219). Median OS was 13.3months (m) for RAM vs 11.7m for PBO. The PFS HR was 0.79 (95% CI: 0.70, 0.90; log-rank p = 0.0005). Median PFS with RAM was 5.7m and 4.5m for PBO. ORR was 13.4% RAM; 12.5% PBO (p = 0.6336). Subgroup results were consistent with the OS and PFS results. Grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) occurring in >5% of pts in RAM+FOLFIRI were: neutropenia (RAM 38.4% vs PBO 23.3% ), hypertension (11.2% vs 2.8%), diarrhea (10.8% vs 9.7%), and fatigue (11.5% vs 7.8%). Conclusions: RAISE met its primary end-point, demonstrating a statistically significant improvement in OS for RAM and FOLFIRI vs PBO and FOLFIRI in second-line mCRC pts. Benefits were similar across important clinical subgroups and no unexpected AEs were identified. Clinical trial information: NCT01183780.

Final Results of Phase III SYMMETRY Study: Randomized, Double-Blind Trial of Elesclomol Plus Paclitaxel Versus Paclitaxel Alone As Treatment for Chemotherapy-Naive Patients With Advanced Melanoma

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (9) ◽  
pp. 1211-1218 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven J. O'Day ◽  
Alexander M.M. Eggermont ◽  
Vanna Chiarion-Sileni ◽  
Richard Kefford ◽  
Jean Jacques Grob ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Survival Data ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Advanced Melanoma ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
End Point ◽  
Phase Iii Study ◽  
Induced Apoptosis

Purpose Elesclomol, an investigational first-in-class compound, induces oxidative stress, triggers mitochondrial-induced apoptosis in cancer cells, and shows synergy with taxanes in tumor models. Following completion of a phase II trial of elesclomol in combination with paclitaxel that met its primary end point of progression-free survival (PFS), this randomized, double-blind, controlled phase III study was conducted to confirm the efficacy and tolerability of elesclomol in combination with paclitaxel versus paclitaxel alone in patients with advanced melanoma. Patients and Methods Patients with stage IV chemotherapy-naive melanoma (n = 651) were randomly assigned 1:1 to paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 either alone or in combination with elesclomol 213 mg/m2 administered weekly for 3 weeks of a 4-week cycle. Patients were stratified by prior systemic treatment, M1 subclass, and baseline lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels. The primary end point was PFS. Results The study did not achieve its PFS end point (hazard ratio, 0.89; P = .23). The study was stopped when an early overall survival data analysis indicated an imbalance in total deaths favoring paclitaxel, predominantly in patients with high LDH levels. A prospectively defined subgroup analysis revealed a statistically significant improvement in median PFS for the combination in patients with normal baseline LDH. Conclusion The addition of elesclomol to paclitaxel did not significantly improve PFS in unselected patients with advanced melanoma. The association between baseline LDH and clinical outcomes suggests that LDH may be a predictive factor for treatment with this combination, consistent with recent findings on the association between elesclomol anticancer activity and cellular metabolic state.

scholarly journals Five-Year Outcomes With Nivolumab in Patients With Wild-Type BRAF Advanced Melanoma

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (33) ◽  
pp. 3937-3946
Author(s):  
Caroline Robert ◽  
Georgina V. Long ◽  
Benjamin Brady ◽  
Caroline Dutriaux ◽  
Anna Maria Di Giacomo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Advanced Melanoma ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Durable Response ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
End Points

PURPOSE The CheckMate 066 trial investigated nivolumab monotherapy as first-line treatment for patients with previously untreated BRAF wild-type advanced melanoma. Five-year results are presented herein. PATIENTS AND METHODS In this multicenter, double-blind, phase III study, 418 patients with previously untreated, unresectable, stage III/IV, wild-type BRAF melanoma were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks or dacarbazine 1,000 mg/m2 every 3 weeks. The primary end point was overall survival (OS), and secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and safety. RESULTS Patients were followed for a minimum of 60 months from the last patient randomly assigned (median follow-up, 32.0 months for nivolumab and 10.9 months for dacarbazine). Five-year OS rates were 39% with nivolumab and 17% with dacarbazine; PFS rates were 28% and 3%, respectively. Five-year OS was 38% in patients randomly assigned to dacarbazine who had subsequent therapy, including nivolumab (n = 37). ORR was 42% with nivolumab and 14% with dacarbazine; among patients alive at 5 years, ORR was 81% and 39%, respectively. Of 42 patients treated with nivolumab who had a complete response (20%), 88% (37 of 42) were alive as of the 5-year analysis. Among 75 nivolumab-treated patients alive and evaluable at the 5-year analysis, 83% had not received subsequent therapy; 23% were still on study treatment, and 60% were treatment free. Safety analyses were similar to the 3-year report. CONCLUSION Results from this 5-year analysis confirm the significant benefit of nivolumab over dacarbazine for all end points and add to the growing body of evidence supporting long-term survival with nivolumab mono-therapy. Survival is strongly associated with achieving a durable response, which can be maintained after treatment discontinuation, even without subsequent systemic therapies.

scholarly journals Long-Term Outcomes With Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab or Nivolumab Alone Versus Ipilimumab in Patients With Advanced Melanoma

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jedd D. Wolchok ◽  
Vanna Chiarion-Sileni ◽  
Rene Gonzalez ◽  
Jean-Jacques Grob ◽  
Piotr Rutkowski ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Descriptive Analysis ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Advanced Melanoma ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
End Points ◽  
Unresectable Stage

PURPOSE In the phase III CheckMate 067 trial, durable clinical benefit was demonstrated previously with nivolumab plus ipilimumab and nivolumab alone versus ipilimumab. Here, we report 6.5-year efficacy and safety outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with previously untreated unresectable stage III or stage IV melanoma were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to receive nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg once every 3 weeks (four doses) followed by nivolumab 3 mg/kg once every 2 weeks (n = 314), nivolumab 3 mg/kg once every 2 weeks (n = 316), or ipilimumab 3 mg/kg once every 3 weeks (four doses; n = 315). Coprimary end points were progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) with nivolumab plus ipilimumab or nivolumab versus ipilimumab. Secondary end points included objective response rate, descriptive efficacy assessments of nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus nivolumab alone, and safety. Melanoma-specific survival (MSS; descriptive analysis), which excludes deaths unrelated to melanoma, was also evaluated. RESULTS Median OS (minimum follow-up, 6.5 years) was 72.1, 36.9, and 19.9 months in the combination, nivolumab, and ipilimumab groups, respectively. Median MSS was not reached, 58.7, and 21.9 months, respectively; 6.5-year OS rates were 57%, 43%, and 25% in patients with BRAF-mutant tumors and 46%, 42%, and 22% in those with BRAF–wild-type tumors, respectively. In patients who discontinued treatment, the median treatment-free interval was 27.6, 2.3, and 1.9 months, respectively. Since the 5-year analysis, no new safety signals were observed. CONCLUSION These 6.5-year CheckMate 067 results, which include the longest median OS in a phase III melanoma trial reported to date and the first report of MSS, showed durable, improved clinical outcomes with nivolumab plus ipilimumab or nivolumab versus ipilimumab in patients with advanced melanoma and, in descriptive analyses, with the combination over nivolumab monotherapy.

Phase III, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Study of Docetaxel in Combination With Zibotentan in Patients With Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (14) ◽  
pp. 1740-1747 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karim Fizazi ◽  
Celestia S. Higano ◽  
Joel B. Nelson ◽  
Martin Gleave ◽  
Kurt Miller ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
End Points ◽  
Castration Resistant ◽  
Endothelin A

PurposeAs part of the ENTHUSE (Endothelin A Use) program, the efficacy and safety of zibotentan (ZD4054), an oral specific endothelin A receptor antagonist, has been investigated in combination with docetaxel in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC).Patients and MethodsIn this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III study, patients received intravenous docetaxel 75 mg/m2on day 1 of 21-day cycles plus oral zibotentan 10 mg or placebo once daily. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points included time to pain and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression, pain and PSA response, progression-free survival, health-related quality of life, and safety.ResultsA total of 1,052 patients received study treatment (docetaxel-zibotentan, n = 524; docetaxel-placebo, n = 528). At the time of data cutoff, there had been 277 and 280 deaths, respectively. There was no difference in OS for patients receiving docetaxel-zibotentan compared with those receiving docetaxel-placebo (hazard ratio, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.84 to 1.18; P = .963). No significant differences were observed on secondary end points, including time to pain progression (median 9.3 v 10.0 months, respectively) or pain response (odds ratio, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.61 to 1.16; P = .283). The median time to death was 20.0 and 19.2 months for the zibotentan and placebo groups, respectively. The most commonly reported adverse events in zibotentan-treated patients were peripheral edema (52.7%), diarrhea (35.4%), alopecia (33.9%), and nausea (33.3%).ConclusionDocetaxel plus zibotentan 10 mg/d did not result in a significant improvement in OS compared with docetaxel plus placebo in patients with metastatic CRPC.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document