Sunitinib therapy for patients (pts) with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC): Updated results of two phase II trials and prognostic factor analysis for survival

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 5095-5095 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. E. Rosenberg ◽  
R. J. Motzer ◽  
M. D. Michaelson ◽  
B. G. Redman ◽  
G. R. Hudes ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prognostic Factors ◽  
Treatment Plan ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Time Interval ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Phase Ii Trials ◽  
First Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Line Therapy

5095 Background: Two single-arm phase 2 trials reported a 42% objective response rate (ORR) with sunitinib as second-line therapy in mRCC pts (JAMA 2006;295:2516–24). Efficacy results were updated and an analysis of prognostic factors for survival was performed on pooled data. Methods: Eligibility criteria and treatment plan were nearly identical for both trials. Pts with mRCC who failed =1 prior cytokine-based therapy received sunitinib in repeated 6-week cycles of 50 mg/day orally for 4 weeks, followed by 2 weeks off treatment. Response was assessed by investigators according to RECIST. Pretreatment clinical and biochemical features were examined for prognostic factors by univariate and multivariate analysis (p<0.05 significance level was used in the backward stepwise selection procedure). Results: Updated efficacy data for 168 evaluable pts showed an ORR of 45% (95% CI: 39%, 54%), median progression-free survival (PFS) of 8.4 months (95% CI: 7.9, 10.7), and median overall survival (OS) of 22.3 months (95% CI: 14.8, 36.0). Twenty pts remain on treatment with sunitinib with the longest pt on the drug for >3.5 years with partial response for >3 years. The median duration of response was 11.6 months (95% CI: 9.9, 15.2), and included 1 pt with a complete response for >2 years. The proportion of pts alive at 2 years is 48%. Final prognostic factors for survival in the multivariate model were ECOG PS 0 vs. =1 (p=0.0034); time interval from diagnosis to sunitinib treatment =1 yr vs. <1 yr (p=0.0002); hemoglobin =13 vs. <13 g/dL for males and =11.5 vs. <11.5 g/dL for females (p=0.0002). Conclusions: Median survival is nearly 2 years, which compares favorably to the historical experience (12.7 months) in second-line therapy with other agents (JCO 2004;22:454–63). The influence of sunitinib therapy on patient survival is being investigated in a randomized phase 3 trial compared to interferon-a in first-line therapy for mRCC. Further study of prognostic factors to sunitinib therapy is warranted in the first-line setting. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

scholarly journals Modified FOLFIRINOX as a second-line therapy following gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel therapy in metastatic pancreatic cancer

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Masashi Sawada ◽  
Akiyoshi Kasuga ◽  
Takafumi Mie ◽  
Takaaki Furukawa ◽  
Takanobu Taniguchi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Prognostic Factors ◽  
Prognostic Model ◽  
Prognostic Score ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy

Abstract Background There is no established second-line treatment after failure of gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GnP) therapy for metastatic pancreatic cancer (MPC). This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of the modified FOLFIRINOX (mFFX) as a second-line therapy for MPC and investigate prognostic factors for survival. Methods From 2015–2019, we retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients receiving mFFX for MPC after failure of GnP therapy. Patients were treated every 2 weeks with mFFX (intravenous oxaliplatin 85 mg/m 2 , intravenous irinotecan 150 mg/m 2 , and continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil 2,400 mg/m 2 for 46 hours without bolus infusion) until disease progression, patient refusal, or unacceptable toxicity. Results In total, 104 patients received mFFX. The median overall survival (OS) was 7.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.2-9.8) and the progression-free survival (PFS) 3.9 months (95% CI 2.8-5.0). The objective response rate was 10.6% and the disease control rate 56.7%. The median relative dose intensities of oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and infusional 5-FU were 80.0% (range 21.5-100%), 77.2% (range 38.1-100%), and 85.9% (range 36.9-100%), respectively. Grade 3-4 toxicities were reported in 57 patients (54.8%), including neutropenia, leukopenia, anemia, febrile neutropenia, and peripheral sensory neuropathy. Glasgow prognostic score and carcinoembryonic antigen level were independently associated with survival. Our prognostic model using these parameters could classify the patients into good (n = 38), intermediate (n = 47), and poor (n = 19) prognostic groups. The median OS and PFS time was 14.7 (95% CI 7.6-16.3) and 7.6 months (95% CI 4.1-10.5) for the good prognostic factors, 6.5 (95% CI 5.5-10.0) and 3.6 months (95% CI 2.7-4.8) for the intermediate prognostic factors and 5.0 (95% CI 2.9-6.6) and 1.7 months (95% CI 0.9-4.3) for the poor prognostic factors, respectively. Conclusions The mFFX showed to be a tolerable second-line treatment for MPC after GnP failure. Our prognostic model might be useful for deciding whether mFFX is indicated in this setting.

Intravenous vinorelbine as first-line and second-line therapy in advanced breast cancer.

1995 ◽  
Vol 13 (11) ◽  
pp. 2722-2730 ◽  
Author(s):  
B L Weber ◽  
C Vogel ◽  
S Jones ◽  
H Harvey ◽  
L Hutchins ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Advanced Breast Cancer ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Advanced Breast ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy

PURPOSE We evaluated single-agent intravenous (IV) vinorelbine as first- and second-line treatment for advanced breast cancer (ABC) in patients who were not resistant to anthracyclines. Objective tumor response (TR) and toxicity were assessed. PATIENTS AND METHODS A total of 107 women were enrolled onto this multicenter, nonrandomized, open-label phase II study. Patients were stratified into first- and second-line treatment groups, based on prior treatment history. Vinorelbine was initially given at 30 mg/m2/wk, with dose modification for toxicity as indicated. Therapy was continued until disease progression or severe toxicity mandated withdrawal or until the patient asked to be removed from the study. RESULTS The objective response rate for all patients was 34% (95% confidence interval [CI], 25% to 44%): 35% (95% CI, 23% to 48%) for first-line patients and 32% (95% CI, 20% to 47%) for second-line patients. Nine first-line and three second-line patients obtained a complete response (CR). The median duration of objective response was 34 weeks in both groups. The overall survival durations of first- and second-line patients were 67 weeks and 62 weeks, respectively. Granulocytopenia was the predominant dose-limiting toxicity. Two patients died on study as a result of granulocytopenic sepsis. CONCLUSION Single-agent vinorelbine is an effective and well-tolerated agent for first- and second-line therapy of ABC. The results of this study confirm the findings of similar international trials and suggest vinorelbine should be considered a valid treatment option for patients with ABC and a potential component in future combination regimens for this disease.

Nomogram to estimate the activity of second-line therapy for advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC).

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4524-4524
Author(s):  
Guru Sonpavde ◽  
Gregory Russell Pond ◽  
Neeraj Agarwal ◽  
Toni K. Choueiri ◽  
Angela Q. Qu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prognostic Factors ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Phase Ii Trials ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
The Impact

4524 Background: Prognostic factors may impact on endpoints used in phase II trials of second-line therapy for advanced UC. We aimed to study the impact of prognostic factors (liver metastasis [LM], anemia [Hb<10 g/dl], ECOG-performance status [PS] ≥1, time from prior chemotherapy [TFPC]) on PFS6 and RR. Methods: Twelve phase II trials evaluating second-line chemotherapy and/or biologics (n=748) in patients with progressive disease were pooled. PFS was defined as tumor progression or death from any cause. PFS6 was defined from the date of registration and calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RR was defined using RECIST 1.0. A nomogram predicting PFS6 was constructed using the RMS package in R (www.r-project.org). Results: Data regarding progression, Hb, LM, PS and TFPC were available from 570 patients. The mean age was 65.1 years, 45.3% had ECOG-PS ≥1, 30.2% had LM, 14.6% had anemia and TFPC was <6 months (mo) in 60.2%. The overall median PFS was 2.7 mo, PFS6 was 22.2% (95% CI: 18.8-25.9) and RR was 17.5% (95% CI: 14.5%-20.9%). For every unit increase in risk group, the hazard of progression increased by 41% and the odds of response decreased by 48% (Table). A nomogram was constructed to predict PFS6 on an individual patient level. Conclusions: PFS6 and RR vary as a function of prognostic factors in patients receiving second-line therapy for advanced UC. A nomogram incorporating prognostic factors might facilitate the evaluation of activity across phase II trials enrolling heterogeneous populations and can help to select and stratify patients for phase III evaluation of suitable agents. [Table: see text]

A multi-center phase Ib/II study of nal-irinotecan, 5-fluouracil and leucovorin in combination with nivolumab as second-line therapy for patients with advanced unresectable biliary tract cancer.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS4154-TPS4154
Author(s):  
Vaibhav Sahai ◽  
Tyler Howard Buckley ◽  
Kent A. Griffith ◽  
Mark Zalupski
Keyword(s):  
Dose Level ◽  
Biliary Tract ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Cell Subset ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Phase Ib ◽  
Line Therapy

TPS4154 Background: Patients (pts) with advanced biliary tract cancers (BTC) have poor prognosis despite systemic chemotherapy, and treatment beyond first-line platinum doublet remains investigational. The immunomodulatory properties of conventional cytotoxic therapy, particularly in regard to the upregulation of PD-L1 expression rendering tumor cells more sensitive to T cell-mediated lysis and neoantigen production, rapid emergence of chemotherapy resistance, and known modest efficacy of single agent PD-1 antibody in BTC provide a rationale for combining chemotherapy and immunotherapy. This multi-center, phase Ib/II, single-arm study is designed to investigate the role of nal-irinotecan, 5-FU and leucovorin in combination with nivolumab as second-line therapy in pts with advanced BTC. Methods: Key eligibility criteria include histologically confirmed advanced, unresectable biliary carcinoma (intra- or extra-hepatic and gallbladder) with progression or intolerance of first-line systemic therapy (excluding irinotecan and PD-1/PD-L1 antibody), measurable disease per RECIST v1.1, ECOG PS 0-1, Child Pugh A or B7, and absence of autoimmune disease or chronic steroid use. Primary objective of the phase Ib portion is to determine the recommended phase 2 dose, and of the phase II portion is to evaluate the median progression-free survival. Secondary objectives include evaluation of objective response rate per immune related (ir)RECIST, median OS and safety in this patient population. Exploratory objectives include identification of biomarker predictors of response and mechanisms of resistance through serial biopsies and blood collection (pre, on and post therapy), including sequential whole exome/transcriptomic analysis and immune cell subset analysis (tissue and blood). Therapy includes nal-irinotecan 70 mg/m2, leucovorin 200 (dose level -1) or 400 mg/m2 (dose level 0), 5-fluouracil 2400 mg/m2 IV over 46 hours, and nivolumab 240 mg on day 1 every 2 weeks for 6 months. In the absence of disease progression, pts may continue therapy for up to 2 years. Accrual goal is 30 evaluable pts. Using a null hypothesis value of median PFS of 2.9 months, and an alternative hypothesis of 5.0 months, this ongoing study has > 80% power, with a two-sided alpha of 0.05 to identify treatment efficacy of study arm. Clinical trial information: NCT03785873.

scholarly journals Modified FOLFIRINOX as a second-line therapy following gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel therapy in metastatic pancreatic cancer

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Masashi Sawada ◽  
Akiyoshi Kasuga ◽  
Takafumi Mie ◽  
Takaaki Furukawa ◽  
Takanobu Taniguchi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Prognostic Factors ◽  
Prognostic Model ◽  
Prognostic Score ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy

Abstract Background There is no established second-line treatment after failure of gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GnP) therapy for metastatic pancreatic cancer (MPC). This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of the modified FOLFIRINOX (mFFX) as a second-line therapy for MPC and investigate prognostic factors for survival. Methods From 2015–2019, we retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients receiving mFFX for MPC after failure of GnP therapy. Patients were treated every 2 weeks with mFFX (intravenous oxaliplatin 85 mg/m 2 , intravenous irinotecan 150 mg/m 2 , and continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil 2,400 mg/m 2 for 46 hours without bolus infusion) until disease progression, patient refusal, or unacceptable toxicity. Results In total, 104 patients received mFFX. The median overall survival (OS) was 7.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.2-9.8) and the progression-free survival (PFS) 3.9 months (95% CI 2.8-5.0). The objective response rate was 10.6% and the disease control rate 56.7%. The median relative dose intensities of oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and infusional 5-FU were 80.0% (range 21.5-100%), 77.2% (range 38.1-100%), and 85.9% (range 36.9-100%), respectively. Grade 3-4 toxicities were reported in 57 patients (54.8%), including neutropenia, leukopenia, anemia, febrile neutropenia, and peripheral sensory neuropathy. Glasgow prognostic score and carcinoembryonic antigen level were independently associated with survival. Our prognostic model using these parameters could classify the patients into good (n = 38), intermediate (n = 47), and poor (n = 19) prognostic groups. The median OS and PFS time was 14.7 (95% CI 7.6-16.3) and 7.6 months (95% CI 4.1-10.5) for the good prognostic factors, 6.5 (95% CI 5.5-10.0) and 3.6 months (95% CI 2.7-4.8) for the intermediate prognostic factors and 5.0 (95% CI 2.9-6.6) and 1.7 months (95% CI 0.9-4.3) for the poor prognostic factors, respectively. Conclusions The mFFX showed to be a tolerable second-line treatment for MPC after GnP failure. Our prognostic model might be useful for deciding whether mFFX is indicated in this setting.

scholarly journals Modified FOLFIRINOX as a second-line therapy following gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel therapy in metastatic pancreatic cancer

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Masashi Sawada ◽  
Akiyoshi Kasuga ◽  
Takafumi Mie ◽  
Takaaki Furukawa ◽  
Takanobu Taniguchi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Prognostic Factors ◽  
Prognostic Model ◽  
Prognostic Score ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy

Abstract Purpose There is no established second-line treatment after failure of gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GnP) therapy for metastatic pancreatic cancer (MPC). This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of the modified FOLFIRINOX (mFFX) as a second-line therapy for MPC and investigate prognostic factors for survival.Methods From 2015–2019, we retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients receiving mFFX for MPC after failure of GnP therapy. Patients were treated every 2 weeks with mFFX (intravenous oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, intravenous irinotecan 150 mg/m2, and continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil 2,400 mg/m2 for 46 hours without bolus infusion) until disease progression, patient refusal, or unacceptable toxicity.Results In total, 104 patients received mFFX. The median overall survival (OS) was 7.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.2-9.8) and the progression-free survival (PFS) 3.9 months (95% CI 2.8-5.0). The objective response rate was 10.6% and the disease control rate 56.7%. The median relative dose intensities of oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and infusional 5-FU were 80.0% (range 21.5-100%), 77.2% (range 38.1-100%), and 85.9% (range 36.9-100%), respectively. Grade 3-4 toxicities were reported in 57 patients (54.8%), including neutropenia, leukopenia, anemia, febrile neutropenia, and peripheral sensory neuropathy. Glasgow prognostic score and carcinoembryonic antigen level were independently associated with survival. Our prognostic model using these parameters could classify the patients into good (n = 38), intermediate (n = 47), and poor (n = 19) prognostic groups. The median OS and PFS time was 14.7 (95% CI 7.6-16.3) and 7.6 months (95% CI 4.1-10.5) for the good prognostic factors, 6.5 (95% CI 5.5-10.0) and 3.6 months (95% CI 2.7-4.8) for the intermediate prognostic factors and 5.0 (95% CI 2.9-6.6) and 1.7 months (95% CI 0.9-4.3) for the poor prognostic factors, respectively.Conclusions The mFFX showed to be a tolerable second-line treatment for MPC after GnP failure. Our prognostic model might be useful for deciding whether mFFX is indicated in this setting.

Impact of baseline prognostic factors on progression-free survival at 6 months (PFS6) and response in patients receiving second-line therapy for advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC).

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 301-301 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory Russell Pond ◽  
Neeraj Agarwal ◽  
Joaquim Bellmunt ◽  
Toni K. Choueiri ◽  
Angela Q. Qu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prognostic Factors ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Risk Group ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Phase Ii Trials ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
The Impact

301 Background: PFS6 was identified to be a robust intermediate endpoint in the setting of second-line therapy for advanced UC (Sonpavde, ESMO Congress, 2012) We studied the impact of second-line prognostic factors (Sonpavde, ESMO Congress 2012) (liver metastasis [LM], anemia [Hb<10 g/dl], ECOG-performance status [PS] ≥1, time from prior chemotherapy [TFPC]) on PFS6 and response rate (RR) to enable comparison of outcomes across phase II trials. Methods: Twelve phase II trials evaluating second-line chemotherapy and/or biologics (n=748) in patients with progressive disease were pooled. PFS was defined as tumor progression or death from any cause. PFS6 was defined from the date of registration and calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: Data regarding progression, Hb, LM, PS and TFPC were available in 570 patients, who were considered evaluable. The mean age was 65.1 years, 45.3% had ECOG-PS ≥1, 30.2% had LM, 14.6% had anemia and TFPC was <6 months (mo) in 60.2%. The overall median PFS was 2.7 mo, PFS6 was 22.2% (95% CI: 18.8-25.9) and RR was 17.5% (95% CI: 14.5%-20.9%). PFS6 and RR varied significantly according to risk group (Table). For every unit increase in risk group, the hazard of progression in 6 mo increased by 41% and the odds of response decreased by 48%. Conclusions: PFS6 and RR vary as a function of prognostic factors in patients receiving second-line therapy for advanced UC. These data facilitate comparison of outcomes across phase II trials enrolling heterogeneous populations. [Table: see text]

Time from prior chemotherapy (TFPC) as a prognostic factor in advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC) receiving second-line systemic therapy.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4522-4522
Author(s):  
Gregory Russell Pond ◽  
Guru Sonpavde ◽  
Toni K. Choueiri ◽  
Angela Q. Qu ◽  
David J. Vaughn ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prognostic Factors ◽  
Metastatic Disease ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Cox Proportional Hazards ◽  
Prognostic Impact ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Phase Ii Trials ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Prior Chemotherapy ◽  
Line Therapy

4522 Background: Prognostic factors for overall survival (OS) in patients receiving second-line chemotherapy for advanced platinum-pretreated UC include ECOG performance status (PS) >0, hemoglobin (Hb) <10g/dL and the presence of liver metastasis (LM) (Bellmunt J, J Clin Oncol 2010). We hypothesized that time from prior chemotherapy (TFPC) independently impacts OS. Methods: Of 11 available phase II trials evaluating second-line therapy for advanced UC (n=698), 6 trials with available baseline Hb, PS and LM were utilized (n=534). The trials evaluated vinflunine (2 trials), docetaxel plus vandetanib or placebo, paclitaxel-gemcitabine, nanoparticle-albumin-bound paclitaxel and paclitaxel-cetuximab. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate OS from date of starting second-line therapy. Cox proportional hazards regression stratified for trial was used to evaluate the prognostic effect of factors on OS. TFPC was evaluated as a continuous variable, and based on cutpoints of 3, 6, 9 and 12 months (mo) from prior chemotherapy to first study treatment. The choice of optimal cutpoint for TFPC was determined by the maximum likelihood ratio χ2 statistic. Results: Overall, 513 patients were evaluable. 64.1% received prior chemotherapy for metastatic disease. Median OS was 6.8 mo (95% CI: 6.1 to 7.4); range was 0 to 84.2 mo. Median OS was 5.2, 7.1, 8.8, 7.6 and 10.6 mo respectively for TFPC <3 (n=181), 3 to <6 (n=133), 6 to <9 (n=77), 9 to <12 (n=45) and >12 (n=77) mo, respectively. Shorter TFPC was independently prognostic for decreased survival. The optimal cutpoint for TFPC was <3 mo, but no well-defined plateau was observed. PS>0 (HR=1.72, p<0.001), LM (HR=1.41, p=0.002), Hb <10 g/dl (HR=1.59, p=0.001) and TFPC <3 mo (HR=1.67, p<0.001) were significantly prognostic in the multivariate model. Timing of prior chemotherapy (metastatic disease vs. perioperative) was not prognostic. Conclusions: A shorter duration of TFPC exhibited a significant negative prognostic impact on OS independent of known prognostic factors in patients receiving second-line therapy for advanced UC. If externally validated, TFPC should be a stratification factor in trials of second-line therapy for advanced UC.

scholarly journals Modified FOLFIRINOX as a second-line therapy following gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel therapy in metastatic pancreatic cancer

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Masashi Sawada ◽  
Akiyoshi Kasuga ◽  
Takafumi Mie ◽  
Takaaki Furukawa ◽  
Takanobu Taniguchi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Prognostic Factors ◽  
Prognostic Model ◽  
Prognostic Score ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy

Abstract Background There is no established second-line treatment after failure of gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GnP) therapy for metastatic pancreatic cancer (MPC). This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of the modified FOLFIRINOX (mFFX) as a second-line therapy for MPC and investigate prognostic factors for survival. Methods From 2015–2019, we retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients receiving mFFX for MPC after failure of GnP therapy. Patients were treated every 2 weeks with mFFX (intravenous oxaliplatin 85 mg/m 2 , intravenous irinotecan 150 mg/m 2 , and continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil 2,400 mg/m 2 for 46 hours without bolus infusion) until disease progression, patient refusal, or unacceptable toxicity. Results In total, 104 patients received mFFX. The median overall survival (OS) was 7.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.2-9.8) and the progression-free survival (PFS) 3.9 months (95% CI 2.8-5.0). The objective response rate was 10.6% and the disease control rate 56.7%. The median relative dose intensities of oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and infusional 5-FU were 80.0% (range 21.5-100%), 77.2% (range 38.1-100%), and 85.9% (range 36.9-100%), respectively. Grade 3-4 toxicities were reported in 57 patients (54.8%), including neutropenia, leukopenia, anemia, febrile neutropenia, and peripheral sensory neuropathy. Glasgow prognostic score and carcinoembryonic antigen level were independently associated with survival. Our prognostic model using these parameters could classify the patients into good (n = 38), intermediate (n = 47), and poor (n = 19) prognostic groups. The median OS and PFS time was 14.7 (95% CI 7.6-16.3) and 7.6 months (95% CI 4.1-10.5) for the good prognostic factors, 6.5 (95% CI 5.5-10.0) and 3.6 months (95% CI 2.7-4.8) for the intermediate prognostic factors and 5.0 (95% CI 2.9-6.6) and 1.7 months (95% CI 0.9-4.3) for the poor prognostic factors, respectively. Conclusions The mFFX showed to be a tolerable second-line treatment for MPC after GnP failure. Our prognostic model might be useful for deciding whether mFFX is indicated in this setting.

Active immunotherapy in patients with progressive disease (PD) after first-line therapy: Racotumomab experience.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 3086-3086 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roberto E Gomez ◽  
Saily Alfonso ◽  
Eduardo Rafael Santiesteban ◽  
Elia Neninger ◽  
Maria Laura Ardigo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Survival Analysis ◽  
Median Survival ◽  
Progressive Disease ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy

3086 Background: Racotumomab is a therapeutic vaccine that induces a cellular and humoral immune response against NeuGc-containing gangliosides expressed in several tumors but not in normal human tissues. A previous randomized, double blinded, placebo-controlled trial has demonstrated low toxicity of racotumomab and a statistically significant benefit in overall survival (OS) in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who had achieved partial or complete response or disease stabilization after first line therapy. Methods: An open, non-randomized study was performed to evaluate if racotumomab could also be beneficial in patients with progressive disease. Patients with recurrent and advanced stages (IIIB/IV) of NSCLC, in progression after completion of first-line onco-specific treatment as per the NCCN Oncology Therapeutic Guidelines (surgery, chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy) were included in the study. Most of them had received 4 to 6 cycles of cisplatin/vinblastin. Vaccination consisted of 5 intradermic doses of racotumomab (1 every 14 days), followed by 1 dose every 28 days until patient refusal or worsening of ECOG status. The patients did not receive second-line therapy. Results: 180 patients were included in an intent to treat (ITT) survival analysis (Kaplan Meier estimate), after at least 10 months of follow-up. Median survival was 8.06 months. OS rate (%) at 24 months was 21%. A control group of 85 consecutive patients treated at the same institution by the same investigators, who did not receive second-line therapy or racotumomab showed a median survival of 6.26 months (log rank test p= 0.011). OS rate (%) at 24 months was only 7%. A per protocol survival analysis including only the 124 patients (68.8%) who received ≥ 5 doses of racotumomab showed a median survival of 12 months. OS rate (%) at 24 months was 30%. Conclusions: Patients with PD after first-line treatment show favorable results in survival when vaccinated with racotumomab. This result is similar to previous clinical trials where racotumomab was administered to patients with objective response (partial or complete) or stable disease after first line therapy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document