Circulating endothelial cell (CEC) monitoring in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients (pts) treated with first-line bevacizumab (BEV)-based combination regimens: Results of the randomized phase II FNCLCC-ACCORD 13/0503 trial

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4071-4071
Author(s):  
F. Farace ◽  
J. Mendiboure ◽  
A. Adenis ◽  
E. Boucher ◽  
J. Pierga ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Trend Test ◽  
Tumor Control ◽  
First Line ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
Color Flow ◽  
Cell Subpopulations ◽  
Metastatic Sites

4071 Background: There is no validated biomarker to predict the efficacy of BEV, an anti-VEGF monoclonal antibody. Rare cell subpopulations such as CEC are good candidates. Methods: Pts with mCRC, aged 18–75 yrs, ECOG performance status (PS) 0–2, and no prior palliative chemotherapy were randomized to either BEV (5 mg/kg) + FOLFIRI every 2 weeks (arm A, 12 cycles) or BEV (7,5 mg/kg) + XELIRI every 3 weeks (arm B, 8 cycles). BEV was continued until disease progression [PD]. The primary endpoint was crude 6-month progression-free survival (PFS) rate. In consenting pts, CEC (CD45-CD31+CD146+7- amino-actinomycin- cells) were measured at baseline (Day [D]1, before treatment), D8, and at the end of cycle 1 (D15 or 22) in 1-mL whole blood by four-color flow cytometry according to a method we established previously (J Immunol Methods 2008). Results were correlated to pts’ characteristics and primary endpoint (Wilcoxon's, Fisher's, and trend tests). Results: From 03/06 to 01/08, we enrolled 145 pts (male, 56%; median age, 61 yrs; PS 0–1, 91%; number of metastatic sites [1/2/>2], 45/48/8%). Pts with at least one CEC measurement (n=99; arm A, 51; arm B, 48) did not differ from the 46 other pts regarding sex, age, PS, and number of metastatic sites. Baseline CEC levels (n=97; median, 16/mL) were higher in PS 1–2 pts (n=42) than in PS 0 pts (n=55) (17 vs. 12/mL, p=0.02) (age, sex, number of metastatic sites: NS) and in pts with PD (n=17) than in pts with non- PD (n=80) at 6 months (30 vs. 15/mL, p=0.004). CEC levels were higher at the end of cycle 1 in the PD group (n=17) than in the non-PD group (n=74) (34 vs. 14/mL, p=0.01). The 6-month PFS rate varied from 0% to 32% in the 4 groups defined by baseline and end-of-cycle- 1 CEC values (cutoff: baseline median) (trend test, p=0.006) ( table ). Conclusions: Baseline and end-of-cycle-1 CEC levels may predict tumor control in patients with mCRC starting first-line BEV + chemotherapy. [Table: see text] [Table: see text]

Randomized phase III trial of imatinib (IM) rechallenge versus placebo (PL) in patients (pts) with metastatic and/or unresectable gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) after failure of at least both IM and sunitinib (SU): RIGHT study.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. LBA10502-LBA10502 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yoon-Koo Kang ◽  
Min-Hee Ryu ◽  
Baek-Yeol Ryoo ◽  
Hyun Jin Kim ◽  
Jong Jin Lee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Disease Control ◽  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
First Line ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Advanced Gist

LBA10502 Background: To palliate and prolong disease control after failure of all available treatment in advanced GIST, resumption of IM dosing has been commonly practiced based on evidence of rapid GIST progression after discontinuation of all TKIs. We evaluated the efficacy of IM rechallenge in pts with advanced GIST following failure of all TKIs. Methods: Eligible pts had metastatic and/or unresectable GIST with prior benefit from first-line IM (defined as disease control for > 6 months), progressive disease (PD) on first-line IM, PD on or intolerance to SU, and ECOG performance status 0-3. Pts were randomized 1:1 to receive best supportive care with either IM 400 mg po once daily or PL. At the time of PD, pts were unblinded and allowed to cross-over to open-label IM. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) determined by blinded external radiology review according to RECIST v1.0. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), time to progression, disease control rate (DCR) at 12 weeks, and safety. Results: Between July 2010 and January 2013, 81 pts were randomized (IM: 41, PL: 40) at a single Korean center. All baseline characteristics were balanced between the arms and 40% of pts received ≥ 3 prior TKIs. The planned final analysis in March 2013 demonstrated that the primary endpoint was met, with significantly greater PFS for pts randomized to IM vs. PL : 1.8 vs. 0.9 months, respectively (p=0.002), hazard ratio (HR) 0.45 (95% CI, 0.27-0.76). DCR at 12 weeks was 32% for IM vs. 5% for PL (p=0.003). With 92.5 % of PL pts rapidly crossing over to IM, median OS was 8.2 months for IM vs. 7.5 months for PL (HR of 0.99, p=0.982). The most common treatment-emergent AEs (> grade 3) during double-blind period in the IM arm included anemia (29%), fatigue (10%), and hyperbilirubinemia (7%). Conclusions: Rechallenge of IM significantly improves PFS and DCR in pts with advanced GIST after failure of at least IM and SU, likely by continuous kinase inhibition of the bulk of disease clones which retain IM sensitivity. However, TKI-resistant clones continue to progress leading to relatively brief duration of benefit. Clinical trial information: NCT01151852.

Phase II trial of combined chemotherapy with irinotecan, S-1, and bevacizumab (IRIS/Bev) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): Final analysis—Hokkaido Gastrointestinal Cancer Study Group (HGCSG) trial.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 460-460
Author(s):  
Satoshi Yuki ◽  
Yoshito Komatsu ◽  
Hiraku Fukushima ◽  
Takahide Sasaki ◽  
Toraji Amano ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Rest Period ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
First Line Treatment

460 Background: The FIRIS study (Muro K et al. Lancet Oncol 2010;11:853–860) previously demonstrated the non-inferiority of Irinotecan plus S-1 (IRIS) to FOLFIRI for mCRC, with progression-free survival (PFS) as the primary endpoint. We previously reported that IRIS plus bevacizumab (IRIS/Bev) is very effective as first-line treatment (Komatsu Y et al. Acta Oncol. 2012 May 4). We now report the final results of this study. Methods: Eligible patients had to have mCRC with a confirmed diagnosis of adenocarcinoma, an age of >20 years, ECOG performance status (PS) of 0-1, and no history of prior chemotherapy. S-1 (40-60 mg depending on patients body surface area) was given orally, twice daily for 2 consecutive weeks, and 100 mg/m2irinotecan and 5 mg/kg bevacizumab was given intravenously on day 1 and 15, followed by 2-week rest period, within a 4-week cycle. The primary endpoint was safety. The secondary endpoints included overall response (OR), PFS, and overall survival (OS). Results: A total of 53 patients were enrolled from October 2007 through March 2009. The results were reported for 52 patients with evaluable lesions. The clinical characteristics of the patients were as follows. The median age was 63.5 years (range, 48 to 82). The male:female ratio was 3:2. The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were neutropenia (27%) and diarrhea (17%). Grade 3 or 4 hypertension (21%) was attributed to bevacizumab, but there were no life-threatening adverse events, such as gastrointestinal perforation. On an intention-to-treat basis, OR was 63.5% [95% confidence interval (CI) 50.4-76.5%], and the disease control rate was 94.2%. With a median follow-up time of 51.7 months, median PFS was 17.0 months (95%C.I. 14.2-19.8 months) and median survival time was 39.6 months (95%C.I. 34.2-45.0 months). Conclusions: IRIS/Bev is a remarkably active and generally well-tolerated first-line treatment for patients with mCRC. Randomized control trial comparing this regimen with oxaliplatin containing regimen(XELOX or mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab: TRICOLORE study) is already started. Clinical trial information: NCT00569790.

First-line nivolumab (NIVO) plus ipilimumab (IPI) plus two cycles of chemotherapy (chemo) versus chemo alone (4 cycles) in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): Two-year update from CheckMate 9LA.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9000-9000
Author(s):  
Martin Reck ◽  
Tudor-Eliade Ciuleanu ◽  
Manuel Cobo ◽  
Michael Schenker ◽  
Bogdan Zurawski ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Benefit ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Expression Level ◽  
First Line ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
Grade 3

9000 Background: In the randomized phase 3 CheckMate 9LA trial (NCT03215706), first-line NIVO + IPI combined with 2 cycles of chemo significantly improved overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and objective response rate (ORR) vs chemo alone (4 cycles). Clinical benefit was observed regardless of programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression level and histology. Here we report data with 2 years’ minimum follow-up from this study. Methods: Adult patients (pts) with stage IV / recurrent NSCLC, ECOG performance status ≤ 1, and no known sensitizing EGFR/ALK alterations were stratified by PD-L1 (< 1% vs ≥ 1%), sex, and histology (squamous vs non-squamous) and were randomized 1:1 to NIVO 360 mg Q3W + IPI 1 mg/kg Q6W + chemo (2 cycles; n = 361) or chemo alone (4 cycles; n = 358). Pts with non-squamous NSCLC in the chemo-alone arm could receive pemetrexed maintenance. The primary endpoint was OS. Secondary endpoints included PFS and ORR by blinded independent central review, and efficacy by different PD-L1 levels. Safety was exploratory. Results: At a minimum follow-up of 24.4 months for OS (database lock: Feb 18, 2021), pts treated with NIVO + IPI + chemo continued to derive OS benefit vs chemo, with a median OS of 15.8 months vs 11.0 months, respectively (HR, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.61–0.86]); 2-year OS rates were 38% vs 26%. Median PFS with NIVO + IPI + chemo vs chemo was 6.7 months vs 5.3 months (HR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.56–0.79]); 8% and 37% of pts who had disease progression received subsequent immunotherapy, respectively. ORR was 38% with NIVO + IPI + chemo vs 25% with chemo. Similar clinical benefit with NIVO + IPI + chemo vs chemo was observed in all randomized pts and across the majority of subgroups, including by PD-L1 expression level (Table) or histology. Any grade and grade 3–4 treatment-related adverse events were reported in 92% and 48% of pts in the NIVO + IPI + chemo arm vs 88% and 38% in the chemo arm, respectively. Conclusion: With 2 years’ minimum follow-up, first-line NIVO + IPI + chemo demonstrated durable survival and benefit versus chemo in pts with advanced NSCLC; no new safety signals were identified. Clinical trial information: NCT03215706. [Table: see text]

The prognostic impact of bone metastasis in urothelial carcinoma treated with first-line platinum-based chemotherapy.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 415-415
Author(s):  
Husam Alqaisi ◽  
Zachary William Neil Veitch ◽  
Carlos Stecca ◽  
Jeenan Kaiser ◽  
Scott A. North ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Urothelial Carcinoma ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Response To Treatment ◽  
Prognostic Impact ◽  
First Line ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
Cancer Centre ◽  
Platinum Based Chemotherapy ◽  
Line Setting

415 Background: Metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) is an aggressive disease with a median overall survival (OS) of ≈ 15 months. In the first-line setting, key prognostic factors include ECOG performance status, white blood cell count, and response to treatment per the Galsky nomogram. Bone metastases (BM) in mUC are associated with morbidity and mortality but are grouped with visceral disease; hence, their impact on prognosis is not well established. We aimed to assess the survival impact of BM in mUC patients treated with first-line platinum-based chemotherapy (PBC). Methods: A retrospective collection of patient and tumor characteristics, with clinical response to treatment (complete response [CR], partial response [PR]; stable disease [SD] or progressive disease [PD]) for patients treated at Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Tom Baker Cancer Centre, and Cross Cancer Institute from 2005-2018 was performed. Progression-free survival (PFS) and OS were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Univariate (UVA) followed by multivariate analysis (MVA) of patient variables [Cox] using PFS and OS was performed. Results: Overall 376 mUC patients were included; 222 (59%) had soft-tissue metastases (STM) only, 70 (19%) had bone-only metastases, and 84 (22%) had both STM and BM. Overall, 35% had PR or CR, 19% had SD, and 39% had PD (7%: unknown response). The median PFS and OS for the whole cohort were 5.6 months (95%CI: 4.8-6.4) and 9.7 months (95% CI: 8.8-10.8) respectively. Select UVA by metastatic site showed inferior PFS for bone-only (p=0.03) and combination STM and BM (p=0.017). Only combination STM and BM were significant on UVA for OS (p=0.002). MVA showed that bone-only metastases (p=0.03) and ECOG 3-4 (p<0.0001) were associated with worse PFS (Table). Predictors of worse OS were the combination of STM and BM (p=0.02), ECOG 3-4 (p=0.001), and WBCs ≥ULN (p=0.02), (Table). Conclusions: BM are a significant predictor of worse outcomes for mUC patients treated with first-line PBC. Consideration as a treatment stratification factor for future studies is suggested. Strategies for the treatment of mUC patients with BM (ie: bone targeted agents) in the first-line setting should be addressed in future trials. [Table: see text]

Randomized phase III trial of regorafenib in patients (pts) with metastatic and/or unresectable gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) progressing despite prior treatment with at least imatinib (IM) and sunitinib (SU): GRID trial.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. LBA10008-LBA10008 ◽  
Author(s):  
George D. Demetri ◽  
Peter Reichardt ◽  
Yoon-Koo Kang ◽  
Jean-Yves Blay ◽  
Heikki Joensuu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Double Blind Study ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Multikinase Inhibitor

LBA10008 Background: Oral multikinase inhibitor regorafenib (REG) demonstrated substantial activity in a phase II trial in pts with GIST after failure of both IM and SU (J Clin Oncol. 2011; 29:606s; abstr 10007). This phase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of REG for this unmet clinical need. Methods: Eligible pts had metastatic and/or unresectable GIST, objective failure of both prior IM and SU (progressive disease [PD] on, or intolerance to, IM and PD on SU), ≥1 measurable lesion, ECOG performance status 0 or 1. Pts were randomized 2:1 to receive best supportive care plus either REG 160 mg po once daily (3 wks on/1 wk off) or placebo (PL). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) (modified RECIST 1.1, independent central review). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), disease control rate (DCR, defined as rate of partial response [PR] plus stable disease [SD] lasting for ≥12 wks), response rate and duration, safety and correlative genotype analyses. At time of PD, pts were eligible for unblinding and crossover to open-label REG. Results: Between Jan and Aug of 2011, 234 pts were screened; 199 were randomized (REG: 133, PL: 66). Pts were stratified at randomization according to number of prior systemic therapies and geographical region. Baseline characteristics were balanced between the two arms. The primary endpoint was met: median PFS was 4.8 months for REG vs. 0.9 months for PL. Hazard ratio for PFS was 0.27 (95% CI, 0.18-0.39), p<0.0001. PFS rates at 3 and 6 months were 60% and 38% for REG vs. 11% and 0% for PL. DCR was 53% (REG) vs. 9% (PL).The HR for OS was 0.77 (p=0.20) with 85% PL pts having crossed over to REG. The most common > grade 3 treatment-emergent AEs in the REG arm during double-blind study were hypertension (28%), hand-foot skin reaction (21%), and diarrhea (8%). Conclusions: This randomized trial demonstrated that REG significantly improved PFS and DCR in pts with advanced GIST after failure of at least prior IM and SU. REG was well tolerated, with AEs as expected for this class and manageable with dose modifications.

Bevacizumab in combination with first-line metastatic chemotherapy in patients with advanced nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): Results from the cohort study EOLE.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e18005-e18005
Author(s):  
Christos Chouaid ◽  
Roland Schott ◽  
Lionel Falchero ◽  
Franck Bonnetain ◽  
Julien Neaume ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Large Cell Carcinoma ◽  
First Line ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
Study Results ◽  
Chi2 Test

e18005 Background: EOLE, a large cohort of 423 patients included in 1 year (July 2010 – July 2010) with locally advanced, metastatic or recurrent non-squamous NSCLC, aimed to describe the targeted population receiving first-line bevacizumab (Bev) in addition to chemotherapy with regards to progression-free survival, overall survival, safety and quality of life in real clinical practice. Methods: Patients who received physician’s choice of 1st-line Bev-containing treatment were included in this cohort study. Results: This analysis describes the inclusion data of 417 patients consisting of adenocarcinoma (92%), large cell carcinoma (4%), undifferentiated carcinoma in predominantly non-squamous (3%), bronchoalveolar carcinoma (1%). Patient characteristics were as follow: the median age being 60 (years) [32; 84], more males than females (68%), 40% had a baseline ECOG Performance Status (PS) 0, 47% of PS 1 and 12% of PS 2, most patients had Stage IV disease (91%), 13% of patients had never smoked. Tumor location was reported as central for 17% of patents and among them 4% was in contact with the large vessels. For 3% of the lesions a cavitation was notified; and 20% of included patients had brain metastases. The main comorbidities at the inclusion were: cardiovascular (45%), arterial thromboembolic and /or venous (20%) with pulmonary embolism (3%); related to the tumor lesion - bloody sputum (4%) and hemoptysis (1%). 68% of patients have received the dose of Bev 7.5mg/kg q3w; for 49% of patients Bev was combined with cisplatin/pemetrexed, 24% with carboplatin/paclitaxel, 13% with carboplatin/pemetrexed and 7% with cisplatin/gemcitabine. The EGFR mutation analysis was carried out for about 50% of patients. Conclusions: Compared to AVAil and SAil studies, EOLE cohort included more patients classified as having: a baseline PS of 2 (p <0.0001, Fisher test), a never smoked status (p<0.0001, chi2 test) and an adenocarcinoma (92%) (p<0.0001, chi2 test). Around a half of included patients received combination Bev - cisplatin /pemetrexed.

Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase II trial of first-line platinum/docetaxel with or without erlotinib (E) in patients (pts) with recurrent and/or metastatic (R/M) head and neck squamous cell carcinomas (HNSCCs).

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6017-6017 ◽  
Author(s):  
William Nassib William ◽  
Lei Feng ◽  
Merrill S. Kies ◽  
Salmaan Ahmed ◽  
George R. Blumenschein ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Type I Error ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Local Treatment ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Type I ◽  
Phase 2 ◽  
First Line ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Phase 2 Trial

6017 Background: In a single-arm, phase 2 study, we previously demonstrated that in pts with R/M HNSCC, cisplatin, docetaxel and E improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared to historical data (Kim et al., ASCO 2006). Herein, we evaluated this regimen in a single center, randomized, phase 2 trial. Methods: Pts with R/M HNSCC, with a performance status (PS) 0-2, were randomized (1:1) to receive up to 6 cycles of first-line chemotherapy with cisplatin 75 mg/m2 (or carboplatin AUC 6) and docetaxel 75 mg/m2 i.v. on day 1 every 21 days, plus placebo (P) vs. E 150 mg p.o. daily, followed by maintenance P or E until disease progression. The primary endpoint was PFS. With 120 pts, the study had 80% power to detect an improvement in median PFS from 3.0 to 4.9 months with a two-sided type I error rate of 0.1. Results: From 05/2010 to 07/2015, 120 pts were randomized to the P (N = 60) or E (N = 60) groups. All pts but one initiated treatment and were eligible for evaluation of the primary endpoint – 92 males; median age 62 years; 52 oropharynx, 40 oral cavity, 19 larynx, 8 hypopharynx cancer pts; 86 current/former smokers; 43 with recurrence within 6 months of completion of local treatment; 27 with prior exposure to EGFR inhibitors. Median PFS was 4.4 vs. 6.1 months for the P and E groups, respectively (hazard ratio [HR] 0.63, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.42-0.95 months, p = 0.026). Response rates were 44% vs. 56% for P vs. E (p = 0.21). Median overall survival (OS) for P- and E-treated pts was 13.7 vs. 17.0 months (HR = 0.67, 95% CI 0.43-1.04, p = 0.07). Benefits from E on PFS and OS were more pronounced in pts with oropharyngeal tumors (p≤0.05 for interaction). In the E group, first-cycle rash grade 2-4 (34% pts) was associated with longer OS (HR = 0.40, p = 0.02). E-treated pts experienced a higher incidence of grade 3-4 adverse events (33.9 vs. 53.3%), including diarrhea (3 vs.17%), dehydration (5 vs. 15%), nausea (5 vs. 14%), rash (0 vs. 12%). Conclusions: This study met its primary endpoint. Addition of E to first-line platinum/docetaxel improved PFS and OS. This regimen may warrant further evaluation in randomized, phase 3 trials. Clinical trial information: NCT01064479.

scholarly journals Multiple Myeloma (MM) in the Very Old: Disease Characteristics, Treatment Patterns and Outcomes in the Real World

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 21-22
Author(s):  
Smith Giri ◽  
Susan Bal ◽  
Kelly N. Godby ◽  
Grant R Williams ◽  
Luciano J. Costa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Surrogate Marker ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
First Line ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
Systems Research ◽  
Ecog Ps

Introduction: Older adults with MM continue to remain under-represented in clinical trials, leading to paucity of information regarding the clinical characteristics and treatment outcomes, particularly among those 80y or older at the time of diagnosis. The International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) classifies any patient &gt;80y as frail, irrespective of their fitness status. The value of geriatric assessment and frailty evaluation in this subgroup remain unclear. Methods: We used the Flatiron Health electronic record-derived de-identified database to source patients with incident MM diagnosed between January 1, 2011 and February 1, 2020. We compared clinical and demographic characteristics of patients ≥80y at the time of diagnosis with patients who were &lt;80y of age. We abstracted baseline labs and cytogenetic data documented within 90 days from the start of first-line therapy. For those ≥80y, we captured the receipt of first line anti-myeloma therapy and examined early mortality (death within 6 months of diagnosis), derived progression-free survival (dPFS) and overall survival (OS) using Kaplan-Meier methods and Cox multivariate regression, with date of diagnosis as the index date. Finally, we compared dPFS and OS among potentially fit ≥80yo MM vs those between 75-79y, using ECOG performance status (PS) of zero as a surrogate marker of fitness status. Results: Of 8298 MM patients in this cohort, 1144 (13.5%) patients were ≥80y at diagnosis (median 81y, range 80-85y). Compared with the younger cohort, those ≥80y were more likely to be white, and have anemia, renal insufficiency, higher β2-microglobulin and higher stage at diagnosis. However, there was a lower prevalence of documented high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities, particularly high risk translocations (t4;14 and t14;16) even after adjusting for race/ethnicity (Mantel Haenszel OR=0.67; p 0.001). Common first line therapies included proteasome inhibitor (PI) + Immunomodulatory agent (Imid) based triplet (23%), Imid doublet (21%) and PI doublet (27%) (Table). Patients ≥80y received a median of 1 (IQR 1-2) lines of therapy, as opposed to those &lt;80 (median 2, IQR 1-3). Overall, the outcome was significantly inferior among the ≥80y patients be those &lt;80y (median dPFS 16 vs. 39 months, p&lt;0.01; median OS: 26 vs 37 months, p&lt;0.01; and 6-month mortality rate: 20.1% vs 6.2%, p&lt;0.01). However, patients ≥80y and ECOG PS of 0 had similar 3y-dPFS (36.8 vs 33.1%; p=0.66) and 3y-OS (61.8 vs 65.2%; p=0.50) when compared to those between 75-79y with similar PS (ECOG PS of 0) (Figure). Conclusion: Patients 80y or above with newly diagnosed MM have distinct clinical and treatment characteristics as compared to their younger counterparts. Similar survival outcomes between older adults with good performance status vs their younger fit counterparts suggest the need for conducting a comprehensive frailty evaluation and individualized decision-making even in this cohort. Disclosures Giri: Carevive Systems: Honoraria; Pack Health: Research Funding; Carevive Systems: Research Funding. Costa:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Genentech: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria.

scholarly journals Folfirinox versus gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel as first-line therapy in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer: a comparative propensity score study

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 175628481987866 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicolas Williet ◽  
Angélique Saint ◽  
Anne-Laure Pointet ◽  
David Tougeron ◽  
Simon Pernot ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Propensity Score ◽  
Liver Metastases ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Reverse Sequence ◽  
Metastatic Sites

Background: Folfirinox (FFX) and gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (GN) are both standard first-line treatments in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPC). However, data comparing these two chemotherapeutic regimens and their sequential use remain scarce. Methods: Data from two independent cohorts enrolling patients treated with FFX ( n = 107) or GN ( n = 109) were retrospectively pooled. Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Progression-free survival (PFS) was the secondary endpoint. A propensity score based on age, gender, performance status (PS), and presence of liver metastases was used to make groups comparable. Results: In the whole study population, OS was significantly higher in FFX (14 months; 95% CI: 10–21) than in GN groups (9 months; 95% CI: 8–12) before ( p = 0.008) and after ( p = 0.021) adjusting for age, number of metastatic sites, liver metastases, peritoneal carcinomatosis and CA19.9 level at baseline. PFS tends to be higher in FFX (6 months) than GN groups (5 months; p = 0.053). After matching ( n = 49/group), patients were comparable for all baseline characteristics including PS. In the matched population, there was a trend toward greater OS in patients treated with FFX (HR = 0.67; p = 0.097). However, survival in each group was not solely a result of the first-line regimen. The proportion of patients who were fit for GN after FFX failure (FFX–GN sequence) was higher (46.9%) than the reverse sequence (20.4%; p = 0.01), which suggests a higher feasibility for the FFX–GN sequence. Corresponding median OS were 19 months versus 9.5 months, respectively ( p = 0.094). Conclusion: This study shows greater OS with FFX than with GN in patients with mPC. GN after FFX failure appears more feasible than the reverse sequence.

Safety and efficacy of capecitabine (C) plus bevacizumab (B) as first-line in metastatic breast cancer

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1013-1013 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Sledge ◽  
K. Miller ◽  
C. Moisa ◽  
W. Gradishar
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Breast Cancer ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
First Line ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Grade 3

1013 Background: C alone has good activity and tolerability in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) and when combined with docetaxel improves response and survival. C combined with B in heavily pretreated MBC improved the response rate but not PFS. In untreated MBC, the addition of B to chemotherapy significantly improves progression-free survival (PFS) which suggests that B, is most effective in early disease. Methods: Primary objective of this single-arm, 2-phase study, is to evaluate PFS in MBC patients receiving first-line treatment with C 1,000 mg/m2 twice daily on days 1–15 (28 doses) and B 15 mg/kg on day 1. Treatment was repeated every 21 days until progression. Eligibility criteria included HER2-negative MBC previously untreated for metastatic disease; ECOG performance status =1; no prior anti-angiogenic or oral fluoropyrimidine therapy. A sample size of 109 patients (including dropouts) was required to give 90% power to test an improvement from 4 months median PFS to 5.6 months with the two-sided test (a 5%) Results: At data cut-off, 103 patients had received study medication. Present results are based on 103 patients (ITT population), except tumor response which is based on 91 patients who had response evaluation. The average # of cycles received in first phase is 6.8. 84 pts.are alive at this time. 38.5% (35/91) pts. have had a response: complete response 5.5%; partial response 33.0%. Stable disease is 42.9% with 81.4% clinical benefit. Planned dose received is 77.7 % for C and 99.0 % for B. The majority of adverse events (AEs) were mild or moderate. The most common grade 3 AEs were hand-foot syndrome (13%) and pain (10%); grade 4 pulmonary embolism occurred in 2% in the first phase of the study. Conclusions: Updated results with longer follow-up including toxicity, TTP and PFS will be presented at the meeting. It appears that in first-line C+B is active for MBC and is well tolerated, with few grade 3/4 toxicities. [Table: see text]

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document