A randomized phase 2 trial of amrubicin compared to topotecan as second-line treatments in extensive disease small cell lung cancer (SCLC) sensitive to platinum-based first-line chemotherapy

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 18064-18064
Author(s):  
R. M. Jotte ◽  
C. H. Reynolds ◽  
P. Conkling ◽  
J. W. Oliver ◽  
A. Allen
Keyword(s):  
Standard Therapy ◽  
Reference Group ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Phase 2 ◽  
First Line ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Extensive Disease ◽  
Grade 3

18064 Background: SCLC accounts for about 13% of lung cancers and presents as extensive disease (ED-SCLC) in 60%-70% of patients (pts). Treatment options have been limited for ED-SCLC and survival enhanced by a median of only 2–3 months over the past 20 years. Our trial assessed response rates with amrubicin, a fully synthetic anthracycline and inhibitor of DNA topoisomerase II, versus standard therapy topotecan, for second-line treatment of sensitive SCLC. Methods: This phase 2, open-label, multicenter trial compares second-line therapy with amrubicin versus topotecan in ED-SCLC pts (=18 years, ECOG performance status =2), sensitive to first-line platinum-based therapy but with recurrence or progression =90 days later. Pts are randomized to amrubicin (40 mg/m2 via 5-minute bolus infusion daily x 3 days) or topotecan (1.5 mg/m2 via 30-minute infusion daily x 5 days), both starting on Day 1 of a 21 day cycle. Treatment is continued until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal. Response is assessed using RECIST criteria. In all, 75 evaluable pts (50 randomized to amrubicin and 25 to topotecan; 2:1 per the standard topotecan therapy reference group) are planned to be enrolled. Results: To date, 22 pts are enrolled with 15 evaluable for response: 10 on amrubicin; 5 on topotecan. After 1–6 cycles, 5/10 amrubicin pts have responded (1 CR, 4 PRs). One topotecan patient responded (PR) but had progressive disease at the next visit. Seventeen pts are evaluable for safety. Hematological adverse events (AEs, = Grade 3) were the most commonly reported and were similarly observed across treatments (Table). Tachycardia (< Grade 3) was recorded for 1 amrubicin and 2 topotecan pts. No other cardiac AEs were observed. Conclusions: Amrubicin compares favorably with standard therapy topotecan as second-line treatment in sensitive ED-SCLC patients. No anthracycline- induced cardiomyopathy has been observed to date. [Table: see text] No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Oxaliplatin Plus Irinotecan Compared With Irinotecan Alone as Second-Line Treatment After Single-Agent Fluoropyrimidine Therapy for Metastatic Colorectal Carcinoma

2008 ◽  
Vol 26 (28) ◽  
pp. 4544-4550 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel G. Haller ◽  
Mace L. Rothenberg ◽  
Alfred O. Wong ◽  
Piotr M. Koralewski ◽  
Wilson H. Miller ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Median Overall Survival ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Sensory Disturbances ◽  
Previously Treated ◽  
Grade 3

Purpose To determine whether irinotecan plus oxaliplatin (IROX) is superior to irinotecan alone in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) previously treated with single-agent fluoropyrimidines. Patients and Methods A phase III, randomized, open-label, multicenter study of patients with metastatic or recurrent CRC that had progressed or recurred during or after adjuvant or first-line fluoropyrimidines (fluorouracil/leucovorin or capecitabine, the latter only for metastatic CRC). Patients received IROX (irinotecan 200 mg/m2 plus oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2) or irinotecan alone (350 mg/m2) every 3 weeks. Results At the data cutoff (when 447 of 628 randomly assigned patients had died), median overall survival was 13.4 months (95% CI, 12.4 to 14.7 months) and 11.1 month (95% CI, 10.0 to 12.7 months) in the IROX and irinotecan groups, respectively (hazard ratio = 0.78; 95% CI, 0.65 to 0.94; P = .0072). Overall response rate (22% v 7%, respectively; P < .0001), median time to progression (5.3 v 2.8 months, respectively; P < .0001), and improvement in tumor-related symptoms (32% v 19%, respectively; P = .0072) were also improved with IROX as compared with irinotecan. With the exception of granulocytopenia (25% v 13%), diarrhea (28% v 23%), and sensory disturbances (5% v 0%), grade 3 to 4 toxicities were comparable between the IROX and irinotecan groups, respectively. Conclusion IROX is an effective treatment for metastatic CRC that has progressed after first-line fluoropyrimidine therapy. IROX improves efficacy compared with irinotecan alone, providing an additional option in the postadjuvant or second-line treatment setting for patients who experience treatment failure with single-agent fluoropyrimidine therapy.

Phase II study evaluating the association of gemcitabine, trastuzumab, and erlotinib as first-line treatment in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (GATE 1).

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 379-379 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Assenat ◽  
Laurent Mineur ◽  
Caroline Mollevi ◽  
Catherine Lombard-Bohas ◽  
Thibault Mazard ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Performance Status ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
First Line Treatment

379 Background: This study aimed to assess the efficacy and tolerance of the combinationof chemotherapy and two targeted therapies as a first-line treatment in metastatic pancreatic cancer patients. Methods: We designed a phase 2 open-label, non-comparative, multicenter study (NCT01204372). Patients received weekly 1000 mg/m² gemcitabine (3 weeks out of 4), weekly trastuzumab (4 mg/kg the first week, 2 mg/kg afterwards) and erlotinib 100 mg/day per os. The primary endpoint was the disease control rate (DCR) according to RECIST. Using a Fleming’s single-stage procedure, the trial was considered positive if 29 patients had a controlled disease (out of 57 evaluable patients). Secondary endpoints included the safety, the progression-free survival (PFS) and the overall survival (OS). An ancillary study addressed the EGFR, HER2 and KRAS status of the patients. Results: Between June 2010 and July 2013, 62 patients were recruited (37 men). The median age was 62 years (range 35-77). Performance status was 0 (n=27) and 1 (n=35). 10 patients had had a surgery of the primary tumor (PT), of whom 6 had been treated with a gemcitabine-based adjuvant chemotherapy (> 6-month delay). PT were localized in the head (n=25), corpus (n=22) and tail (n=15) of pancreas. The number of metastatic sites varied from 1 (n=25) to ≥ 3 (n=15). The baseline median left ventricular ejection fraction was 65% (range 51-86%). All patients were evaluable for safety and 59 patients for efficacy. Main first cycle treatment-related toxicities included: grade 3 anorexia (27%), asthenia (13%), diarrhea (10%), anemia (6%), and thrombocytopenia (3%); grade 3-4 neutropenia (24%), and mucositis (6%); grade 2-3 cutaneous events (35%). No complete responses were observed. 11 patients had a partial response, 33 a stable disease and 15 a disease progression. Therefore, the DCR was 74.6% (95%CI: 61.6-85.0%). Definitive results for the secondary endpoints will be presented at the meeting. Conclusions: Our results showed that combining gemcitabine, trastuzumab and erlotinib is efficient in terms of DCR. A further study is necessary to investigate this promising association. Funding (Roche SAS). Clinical trial information: NCT01204372.

Surufatinib in combination with toripalimab in patients with advanced neuroendocrine carcinoma: Results from a multicenter, open-label, single-arm, phase II trial.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e16199-e16199
Author(s):  
Lin Shen ◽  
Xianjun Yu ◽  
Ming Lu ◽  
Xing Zhang ◽  
Ying Cheng ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Neuroendocrine Carcinoma ◽  
Kinase Inhibitor ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Grade 3

e16199 Background: Patients with advanced neuroendocrine carcinoma (NEC) have a poor prognosis and limited treatment option after first-line treatment. Surufatinib, a multi-kinase inhibitor of VEGFR 1-3, FGFR 1 and CSF-1R, has been approved in patients with advanced or metastatic extra-pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors in China. Toripalimab is a monoclonal humanized IgG4 PD-1 antibody. Surufatinib modulates tumor immune microenvironment and has shown promising antitumor activity in combination with toripalimab in solid tumors, including neuroendocrine tumor and neuroendocrine carcinoma. Herein, we reported the efficacy and safety of surufatinib in combination with toripalimab in a cohort of advanced NEC patients. Methods: The multicenter, open-label, single-arm phase II clinical trial enrolled advanced NEC patients refractory to first-line chemotherapy, and received surufatinib 250 mg once a day orally plus toripalimab 240 mg intravenously on day 1 of a 21-day cycle. The primary end point is objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST 1.1. Results: Twenty-one patients enrolled and received combination therapy. At data cut-off (December 31, 2020), the average treatment cycles were 5.1±3.69 for surufatinib and 5.0±3.68 for toripalimab. Among 20 tumor evaluable patients, 4 patients achieved confirmed PR and 10 patients achieved stable disease. The ORR and disease control rate (DCR) are 20 % (95%CI: 5.7%-43.7%) and 70% (95%CI: 45.7%-88.1%) respectively. The median PFS is 3.94 months (95%CI: 1.31- unknown). OS is not mature till data cut-off. Adverse events (AEs) reported as related to treatment (TRAE) occurred in 100% of patients, of which Grade≥3 TRAEs occurred in 33.3% of patients. The reported Grade≥3 TRAEs were hypertension in 2 (9.5%) patients, and upper abdominal pain, oral mucositis, neutrophil count decreased, leukocyte count decreased, dermatitis, anemia and backache in 1 (4.8%) patient each. Immune related Grade ≥3 AEs, Gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase increased and dermatitis, occurred in 2 (9.5%) patients, respectively. TRAE caused surufatinib or toripalimab interruption occurred in 6 (28.6%) and 4 (19%) patients respectively. There were neither serious AEs nor AEs inducing treatment discontinuations or deaths. Conclusions: As there is no standard second-line treatment, this combination of surufatinib and toripalimab might offer a new promising choice to treat NEC as second-line treatment due to good efficacy and manageable treatment related toxicities. Clinical trial information: NCT04169672.

scholarly journals Post-first-line FOLFOX chemotherapy for grade 3 neuroendocrine carcinoma

2015 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 289-298 ◽  
Author(s):  
J Hadoux ◽  
D Malka ◽  
D Planchard ◽  
J Y Scoazec ◽  
C Caramella ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Neuroendocrine Carcinoma ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Distant Metastases ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Poorly Differentiated ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Folfox Chemotherapy

There is no standard for second-line chemotherapy in poorly differentiated grade 3 neuroendocrine carcinoma (G3-NEC) patients. We analyzed the antitumor efficacy of 5-fluorouracil and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) chemotherapy in this population. A single-center retrospective analysis of consecutive G3-NEC patients treated with FOLFOX chemotherapy after failure of a cisplatinum-based regimen between December 2003 and June 2012 was performed. Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), response rate, and safety were assessed according to RECIST 1.1 and NCI.CTC v4 criteria. Twenty consecutive patients were included (seven males and 13 females; median age 55; range 23–87 years) with a performance status of 0–1 in 75% of them. Primary location was gastroenteropancreatic in 12, thoracic in four, other in two, and unknown in two patients. There were 12 (65%) large-cell and 7 (30%) small-cell G3-NEC tumors, and 1 (5%) unknown. All patients had distant metastases. Twelve (60%) patients received FOLFOX as second-line treatment and 8 (40%) as third-line treatment or later and the median number of administered cycles was 6 (range 3–14). The median follow-up was 19 months. Median PFS was 4.5 months. Among the 17 evaluable patients, five partial responses (29%), six stable diseases (35%), and six progressive diseases (35%) were observed. Median OS was 9.9 months. Main Grade 3–4 toxicities were neutropenia (35%), thrombopenia (20%), nausea/vomiting (10%), anemia (10%), and elevated liver transaminases (10%). Our results indicate that the FOLFOX regimen could be considered as a second-line option in poorly differentiated G3-NEC patients after cisplatinum-based first-line treatment but warrant further confirmation in future larger prospective studies.

Multicenter Phase 2 Study of Combined Gemcitabine and Epirubicin as Second-Line Treatment for Patients With Advanced Ovarian Cancer

2010 ◽  
Vol 20 (6) ◽  
pp. 953-957 ◽  
Author(s):  
Viviana Murgia ◽  
Roberto Sorio ◽  
Claudia Griso ◽  
Orazio Caffo ◽  
Carmela Arcuri ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group ◽  
Advanced Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Hematological Toxicity ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Phase 2 ◽  
Platinum Resistant ◽  
Gynecology And Obstetrics

Objective:The aim of this phase 2 trial was to evaluate the tolerability and efficacy of combined gemcitabine (G) and epirubicin (E) as second-line treatment for patients with advanced ovarian cancer.Methods:Treatment with G 1000 mg/m2 (days 1 and 8) and E 60 mg/m2 (day 1) every 3 weeks for 3 or, in the absence of progression, 6 courses.Results:Fifty patients with advanced ovarian cancer (31 serous, 2 endometrioid, 10 unclassified adenocarcinoma, and 7 other) and a median age of 60 years (range, 38-74 years) were enrolled after giving their informed consent. Performance status according to the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group was 0 in 29 patients (58%), 1 in 17 patients (34%), and 2 in 4 patients (8%), and the initial stages according to the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics were I to II in 4 patients (8%), III in 31 patients (62%), and IV in 15 patients (30%). They had previously received a median of 1.5 lines of treatment (range, 1-4). The median platinum-free interval was 5 months (range, 0-12 months): 32 patients had relapse within 6 months and 18 patients had relapse after 6 months.The response rate was 42% (2% complete response and 40% partial response), with a median duration of 7.2 months: the corresponding figures were 37.5% and 5.2 months in the platinum-resistant patients and 50% and 8.8 months in the platinum-sensitive patients. The main grade 3 to 4 hematological toxicity was neutropenia (56% of cases). After a median follow-up of 13.5 months, median progression-free survival was 5 months, and median overall survival was 23.5 months.Conclusions:This E + G combination seems to be active and safe in platinum-resistant/refractory patients.

Update results from ALTER-C-001: Efficacy and safety of anlotinib plus XELOX regimen as first-line treatment followed by maintenance monotherapy of anlotinib for patients with mCRC-A single-arm, multicenter, phase Ⅱ clinical trial.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e15550-e15550
Author(s):  
Jin Yan ◽  
Yunwei Han ◽  
Li Zhang ◽  
Yongdong Jin ◽  
Hao Sun
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
Multicenter Phase ◽  
First Line Treatment

e15550 Background: The combination of anti-VEGF or anti-EGFR targeted drugs with chemotherapy is the standard first-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), and the followed maintenance treatment is an optional approach to balance the efficacy and toxicity. However, studies regarding the maintenance strategies based on antiangiogenic TKIs are limited currently. Anlotinib, a novel oral multi-target TKI which can inhibit both tumor angiogenesis and tumor cell proliferation simultaneously, substantially prolonged the PFS with manageable toxicity for refractory mCRC in the phase III ALTER0703 clinical trial. Here we report an update on the effectiveness and safety of anlotinib plus XELOX as first-line treatment followed by anlotinib monotherapy for mCRC. Methods: In this open label, single-arm, multicenter phase II clinical trial, 53 mCRC patients without prior systemic treated, aged 18-75 and an ECOG performance status of 0 or 1 were planned to recruit. Eligible patients received capecitabine (1000 mg/m2, po, d1-14, q3w) and oxaliplatin (130 mg/m2, iv, d1, q3w) plus anlotinib (10mg, po, d1̃14, q3w) treatment for 6 cycles. After 6 cycles of inducing therapy, patients would receive anlotinib (12mg, po, d1̃14, q3w) as maintenance therapy until disease progression or intolerable adverse events (AEs). The primary endpoint was PFS; Secondary endpoints included ORR, DCR, DOR and safety. Results: By the data analysis cutoff date of January 22, 2021, a total of 18 patients were enrolled, of which 12 patients were available for efficacy assessment. In best overall response assessment, there were 50.0% PR (6/12), 33.3% SD (4/12) and 16.7% PD (2/12). The ORR was 50.0% (95% CI, 21.1-78.9%) and DCR was 83.3% (95% CI, 51.5-97.9%). The longest duration of treatment was 8.8 months and the response was still ongoing. The median PFS was not reached. The most common treatment related adverse events (TRAEs) of any grade (≥20%) were leukopenia, hypertension, neutropenia, diarrhea, fatigue, hypertriglyceridemia. Grade 3/4 TRAEs included hypertension (22.2%), hypertriglyceridemia (11.1%), lipase elevated (11.1%) and neutropenia (5.6%). No grade 5 AEs occurred. Conclusions: The update results suggested that anlotinib combined with XELOX as first line regimen followed by anlotinib monotherapy showed promising anti-tumor activity and manageable safety for patients with mCRC. And the conclusions needed to be confirmed in trials continued subsequently. Clinical trial information: ChiCTR1900028417.

Impact on second-line treatment after failure of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) combination chemotherapy in extensive-disease small cell lung cancer: Experience of the Okayama Lung Cancer Study Group.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e20590-e20590
Author(s):  
Yuka Kato ◽  
Taku Noumi ◽  
Kazuhiko Saeki ◽  
Kiichiro Ninomiya ◽  
Toshio Kubo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitor ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Extensive Disease ◽  
To Receive ◽  
First Line Treatment

e20590 Background: For patients with extensive-disease small cell lung cancer (ED-SCLC), amrubicin monotherapy is an important therapy in the treatment of recurrence, but there has been no adequate evaluation of how effective it actually is after failure of first-line chemotherapy including immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI). Therefore, the purposes of this study are to determine the proportion of patients who received amrubicin monotherapy in the treatment of relapse after first-line treatment with ICI (arm A) and to investigate the efficacy of amrubicin therapy after arm A compared with after chemotherapy without ICI (arm B). Methods: Consecutive 40 pts with ED-SCLC NSCLC were retrospectively assessed who underwent ICI-containing chemotherapy (n = 19) or standard cytotoxic chemotherapy (n = 21) in the 1st-line setting between 2017 and 2020. Results: In arm A, 3 of 19 patients (16%) were still on first-line ICI maintenance therapy, 2 (2/19; 11%) had ICI treatment adverse events (interstitial pneumonia, cardiopulmonary arrest), and 1 patient could not receive second-line therapy due to a decrease in performance status (PS) to 3. In arm B, 11 of 21 patients (52%) did not receive amrubicin as second-line therapy, including 1 patient with worsening PS, 1 patient with adverse events (hematologic toxicity), 1 patient refusal, and 6 patients with combination of ICI and chemotherapy. 23 patients (arm A; 13 (57%), arm B; 10 (43%)) were able to receive amrubicin monotherapy, including 7 patients (6 cases vs 1 case) were sensitive relapses, and 16 (7 vs 9 cases) were refractory relapses. There was no significant difference in either PFS or survival after first-line treatment in 16 patients with refractory relapse who received amrubicin as second-line treatment (PFS: 4.8 vs 5.2 months, p = 0.51), (median survival after first-line treatment: 9.6 vs 12.8, p = 0.75). Conclusions: Patients who received ICI in the first-line treatment were fully eligible to receive amrubicin in the second-line treatment. The recurrence pattern tended to be sensitive relapse and we found that the efficacy of amrubicin in refractory relapse was not affected by the administration of ICI in the first-line treatment.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document