Paclitaxel in relapsed squamous cell carcinoma of head and neck (SSCHN): Retrospective study of a single institution

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e17047-e17047
Author(s):  
J. Fayette ◽  
A. Montella ◽  
T. Bachelot ◽  
P. Pommier ◽  
D. Girodet ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Neoadjuvant Treatment ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Single Institution ◽  
First Line ◽  
Line P

e17047 Background: For relapse or metastatic SCCHN the standard treatment is the combination of cisplatin and 5FU that showed higher response rate than methotrexate but similar overall survival. Cetuximab demonstrated in a phase III (N Engl J Med. 2008;359:1116) its efficacy and paclitaxel showed efficacy in a phase II study (Cancer. 1998;82:2270). The objective of this study was to evaluate paclitaxel (P) in our institution in various situations. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 56 pts with relapse or metastatic SSCHN treated with P in a single institution in Lyon (France) between June 2002 and February 2008. P was administered in first line for locally advanced disease, in first line for relapsed or metastatic disease, or in second or more line. P was administered q1w or q3w, alone or in combination with carboplatin or cetuximab. Results: Median age was 59 years (36–84) at the beginning of paclitaxel. Localizations of primitive tumor: oral cavity (14%), oropharynx (30%), hypopharynx (39%) larynx (7%), rhinopharynx (4%), or other (6%). All patients received adequate initial treatment with surgery and/or radiotherapy, 47% had have neoadjuvant chemotherapy (71% with cddp-5fu, but 5 pts received P). Five patients received P as neoadjuvant treatment. Among 52 evaluable patients, 33 received P in first line of treatment after relapse, 12 in second line. Monotherapy was administered to 20 patients and 22 received P combined with carboplatin, and 1 with cetuximab. For all patients, objective response rate (OR) was 30.8% (95% CI 18.7–45.1%). In first line of relapse, OR was 39.4% (95% CI 22.9–57.9%) and 16.7% (95% CI 2.1–18.4%) in second line. In monotherapy OR was 30.0% (95% CI 11.9–54.3%) and 36.4% (95% CI 17.2–59.3%) in combination with carboplatin. The overall survival (OS) of all patients was 6.3 months (95% CI 3.9–7.9 m), and 7.7 m (95% CI 3.9–11 m) and 5.2 m (95% CI 2.8–7.9 m) in first and second line, respectively. There is no difference in OS between monotherapy and combination: 6.1 m (95% CI 3.9–7.9 m) and 5.3 m (95% CI 3.9–7.9 m), respectively. Conclusions: P did not improve overall survival but showed interesting response rate in relapsed patients who are often symptomatic. Recent studies suggest high potentialities in combination with EGFR inhibitors. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Activity and survival benefit of second-line chemotherapy (2L-Ctx) in advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma (APC): Pooled analysis of the literature.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e15019-e15019 ◽  
Author(s):  
MinYuen Teo ◽  
Raymond S. McDermott
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Survival Benefit ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Second Line Chemotherapy ◽  
Line Setting ◽  
Line Chemotherapy

e15019 Background: Many clinicians adopt a nihilistic approach to the management of APC. Delivery of 2L-Ctx is relatively uncommon and no recognized standard exists. We sought to examine the published activity of chemotherapy in the 2nd line setting, and the rate of 2L-Ctx delivery and its influence on reported overall survival in 1st line trials. Methods: 1st and 2L-Ctx randomized trials published between 2000 and 2012 were identified from Pubmed, and manuscripts were obtained for data extraction. Pooled weighted objective response rates (ORR) and disease control rates (DCR) were calculated. For 1st line studies, the percentage of patients who received 2L-Ctx were extracted and plotted against reported median overall survival (OS) and post-progression survival (PPS), defined as arithmetic difference between median OS and progression-free survival. Spearman correlation and linear regression were performed. Results: Sixty nine 2L Ctx studies (77 arms, n=2859) were identified. Majority received prior gemcitabine-based chemotherapy. Pooled ORR was 6.6% (95% CI 5.6 – 7.6%) and DCR was 36.7% (34.5 – 38.0%). When only prospective studies were evaluated (42 studies, 48 arms, n=1546), ORR was 5.0% (3.8 – 6.2%) and DCR was 33.9% (31.0 – 36.9%). Exploratory analysis suggested that intensification of gemcitabine-based therapy (ORR: 10.0%; DCR: 54.7%) might be marginally more active than fluoropyrimidine (7.6%; 32.2%) or taxane based 2L-Ctx (5.2%; 33.6%). 28/52 identified 1st line studies (54%) reported the percentage of patients treated with second-line chemotherapy (11 phase II, 28 arms, n=1450; 17 phase III, 33 arms, n=5051). Percentage of 2L-Ctx delivery ranged from 14 – 68% and correlated with OS (r=.49 [.26 – .67], p<.01) and PPS (r=.57 [.36 – .72], p<.01). When phase II studies were excluded, correlation was improved for OS (r=.63 [.35 – .81], p<.01) and PPS (r=.79 [.59 – .89], p<.01). Percentage of locally advanced disease did not correlate with OS/PPS nor affect prior analysis. Conclusions: Whilst awaiting further advancement in the 1st line setting, increased delivery of 2L-Ctx to patients with APC and maintained performance status may offer a survival benefit.

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

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

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

Randomized Phase III Evaluation of Cisplatin Plus Fluorouracil Versus Cisplatin Plus Paclitaxel in Advanced Head and Neck Cancer (E1395): An Intergroup Trial of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group

2005 ◽  
Vol 23 (15) ◽  
pp. 3562-3567 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael K. Gibson ◽  
Yi Li ◽  
Barbara Murphy ◽  
Maha H.A. Hussain ◽  
Ronald C. DeConti ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Head And Neck ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Cell Cancer ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Significant Difference

Purpose To determine the response rate, survival and toxicity of infusional cisplatin plus fluorouracil (CF) versus cisplatin plus paclitaxel (CP) in patients with incurable squamous cell cancer of the head and neck, with the hypothesis that CP is superior. Patients and Methods Two hundred eighteen patients with locally advanced, recurrent, or metastatic disease were randomly assigned to CF (cisplatin 100 mg/m2 day 1 and fluorouracil 1,000 mg/m2/24 hours by continuous intravenous infusion day 1 through 4) or CP (cisplatin 75 mg/m2 day 1 and paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 over 3 hours on day 1). Cycles were repeated every 3 weeks until progression or a minimum of 6 cycles with complete response or stable disease. The primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes included response rate and toxicity. Results No significant difference in overall survival or response rate was seen. Estimated median survival was 8.7 months in the CF group and 8.1 month in the CP group. Objective response rate (complete response plus partial response) was 27% in the CF group and 26% in the CP group. Toxicity was similar between groups, with the most frequent including myelosuppression, thrombocytopenia, anemia, nausea, vomiting, and stomatitis. A total of 12 deaths occurred (CF, seven; CP, five) during treatment; eight from infection, two from hemorrhage, one from cardiac causes and one from unknown causes. Gastrointestinal and hematologic toxicities were more common in the CF group, whereas neurotoxicity was equivalent between groups. Conclusion This phase III, randomized, multicenter trial showed no difference in survival between patients treated with CF or CP.

Vandetanib Plus Pemetrexed for the Second-Line Treatment of Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Randomized, Double-Blind Phase III Trial

2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (8) ◽  
pp. 1067-1074 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard H. de Boer ◽  
Óscar Arrieta ◽  
Chih-Hsin Yang ◽  
Maya Gottfried ◽  
Valorie Chan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Objective Response Rate ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Growth Factor Receptor ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Small Cell Lung

Purpose Vandetanib is a once-daily oral inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor and epidermal growth factor receptor signaling. This randomized, placebo-controlled phase III study assessed the efficacy of vandetanib plus pemetrexed as second-line therapy in advanced non–small-cell lung cancer. Patients and Methods Patients (N = 534) were randomly assigned to receive vandetanib 100 mg/d plus pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 every 21 days (n = 256) or placebo plus pemetrexed (n = 278). Progression-free survival (PFS) was the primary end point; overall survival, objective response rate, disease control rate, time to deterioration of symptoms, and safety were secondary assessments. Results There was no significant difference in PFS between treatment arms (hazard ratio [HR], 0.86; 97.58% CI, 0.69 to 1.06; P = .108). Overall survival was also not significantly different (HR, 0.86; 97.54% CI, 0.65 to 1.13; P = .219). Statistically significant improvements in objective response rate (19% v 8%; P < .001) and time to deterioration of symptoms (HR, 0.71; P = .0052; median, 18.1 weeks for vandetanib and 12.1 weeks for placebo) were observed in patients receiving vandetanib. Adding vandetanib to pemetrexed increased the incidence of some adverse events, including rash, diarrhea, and hypertension, while showing a reduced incidence of nausea, vomiting, anemia, fatigue, and asthenia with no reduction in the dose intensity of pemetrexed. Conclusion This study did not meet the primary end point of statistically significant PFS prolongation with vandetanib plus pemetrexed versus placebo plus pemetrexed. The vandetanib combination showed a significantly higher objective response rate and a significant delay in the time to worsening of lung cancer symptoms versus the placebo arm as well as an acceptable safety profile in this patient population.

scholarly journals Gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel for locally advanced or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Akiko Tsujimoto ◽  
Kentaro Sudo ◽  
Kazuyoshi Nakamura ◽  
Emiri Kita ◽  
Ryusuke Hara ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
First Line ◽  
Resectable Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Borderline Resectable ◽  
Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer

Abstract Overall survival in a phase III study for metastatic pancreatic cancer has significantly improved with gemcitabine (GEM) plus nab-paclitaxel. However, to date, there is limited data on the efficacy and safety of its use for patients with locally advanced (LA) or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC). Here, we investigated the efficacy and safety of first-line GEM plus nab-paclitaxel for LA or BRPC. We retrospectively analysed consecutive patients with pathologically confirmed, untreated LA or BRPC who started receiving first-line GEM plus nab-paclitaxel. A total of 30 patients (LA, n = 22; BRPC, n = 8) were analysed. Twelve patients (40%) without distant metastasis received additional chemoradiotherapy using S-1. Laparotomy was performed on 8 patients and 6 (20%; LA, n = 3; BR, n = 3) achieved R0 resection. Objective response rate was 44.8%. For all patients, median progression-free survival and overall survival were 14.8 and 29.9 months, respectively. Median overall survival for LA was 24.1 months with a 2-year survival rate of 50.8%. The most frequently observed grade 3 or 4 toxicities were neutropenia (73%) and biliary infection (13%). First-line GEM plus nab-paclitaxel was well-tolerated and feasible with an encouraging survival for LA or BRPC.

A phase II trial combining tumor-targeting TP53 gene therapy with gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel as a second-line treatment for metastatic pancreatic cancer.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4139-4139
Author(s):  
Chris Poki Leung ◽  
Minal A. Barve ◽  
Ming-Shiang Wu ◽  
Kathleen F. Pirollo ◽  
James F. Strauss ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gene Therapy ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Phase Ii Trial ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Tp53 Gene ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Published Data ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line

4139 Background: Nearly all stage IV pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PAC) patients progress after first-line treatment, and second-line options are limited. SGT-53 is an investigational product for tumor-targeted TP53 gene therapy that has completed phase Ia/Ib trials [Senser et al (2013), Mol Ther 21:1096; Pirollo et al (2016) Mol Ther 24:1697]. Methods: Here we provide an interim analysis of a Phase II trial (SGT53-02-1; NCT02340117) combining SGT-53 with gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (GEM/ABX). Eligible were first-line patients or those who had progressed after FOLFIRINOX (FFX) and/or gemcitabine-based therapy (second-line). In a 7-week treatment cycle, SGT-53 (3.6 mg DNA) was given once or twice weekly with GEM/ABX (1000 mg/m2/wk and 125 mg/m2/wk, respectively, for 3 of 4 weeks). Progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR) are primary endpoints.Overall survival (OS) and PFS are estimated by Kaplan-Meier analysis. Results: Of all evaluable patients (n=20), best response in 7 patients was determined to be partial response (PR) and 13 had stable disease (SD); none had progressive disease. In the second-line patients (n=11) there were 5 PR and 6 SD after 9 had failed FFX treatment, 3 had failed gemcitabine-based treatment and 1 had failed both. For patients with elevated CA19-9, SGT-53 + GEM/ABX resulted in marked reductions in the tumor marker. Published data for patients with PAC after therapy failure [Mita et al (2019) J Clin Med 8: 761; Portal et al (2015) Br J Cancer 113:989; Wang-Gillam et al (2016) Lancet 387:545] are shown for comparison. Notably, mPFS in our second-line patients was 7.4 months versus 3.1 months for the approved second-line therapy [Wang-Gillam et al (2016)]. This improvement in PFS exceeds the benchmark proposed to predict a clinically meaningful Phase III trial [Rahib et al (2016) Lancet Oncol 2:1209]. Conclusions: Our data suggest a clinically meaningful benefit of adding SGT-53 to GEM/ABX particularly for second-line PAC patients, most of whom had failed prior FFX treatment. Clinical trial information: NCT02340117. [Table: see text]

659 AN SINGLE-ARM OPEN-LABEL PHASE II STUDY OF CAMRELIZUMAB PLUS APATINIB AS SECOND-LINE TREATMENT FOR ADVANCED ESOPHAGEAL SQUAMOUS CELL CARCINOMA

2021 ◽  
Vol 34 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Feng Wang ◽  
Qingxia Fan ◽  
Junsheng Wang ◽  
Tao Wu ◽  
Yonggui Hong ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Squamous Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Squamous Cell ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line

Abstract   Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) as a common malignancy is prevalent in East Asia and in eastern and southern Africa. Although pembrolizumab, nivolumab and camrelizumab are respectively recommended as second-line treatment for advanced ESCC due to improved overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR) was modest. New effective treatments are needed. Hence, the study of camrelizumab plus apatinib (VEGFR2 inhibitor) as second-line treatment for advanced ESCC was performed. Methods This ongoing phase II trial (NCT03736863) in six sites in China enrolled pts aged 18-75 with unresectable locally advanced, locally recurrent, or metastatic ESCC that progressed or were intolerant after first-line chemotherapy, and an ECOG performance status of 0-1. Pts received 200 mg camrelizumab intravenously every 2 weeks and apatinib 250 mg orally once per day in 4-week cycles until disease progression, unacceptable adverse events (AEs) or withdrawal of consent. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed ORR. Secondary endpoints included disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS) and OS. Results At data cutoff (Feb 28, 2021), 52 pts were enrolled, including 42 males and 50 with distant metastases, with the median age of 62 years. In the evaluable population of 39 pts, ORR without confirmation was 43.59% and DCR was 94.87%. The median duration of response was 6.9 months (95% CI 4.57–9.23). The median PFS was 6.8 month (95% CI 2.66–10.94). The 12-month overall survival was 52.2%. A total of 80.8% of pts had treatment-related AEs (TRAEs) with 46.2% of grade ≥ 3 TRAEs. The safety profile of camrelizumab and apatinib was consistent with other anti–PD-1 antibodies and angiogenesis inhibitors. Conclusion This is the first study that evaluates the combination anti–PD-1 antibody and anti-angiogenesis inhibitor as a second-line therapy for advanced ESCC. Camrelizumab plus apatinib showed encouraging clinical efficacy and acceptable safety. Further phase III randomized trials are warranted.

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

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

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

scholarly journals DERN CONTROL POINT INHIBITORS AND THEIR POSSIBILITIES FOR THE THERAPY OF METASTATIC UROTELIAL CANCER

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (5(74)) ◽  
pp. 4-8
Author(s):  
M.N. Tillyashajhov ◽  
S.V. Kamyshov ◽  
E.V. Bojko
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Control Point ◽  
Surface Protein ◽  
New Drugs ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Critical Question ◽  
Accelerated Approval ◽  
New Biomarkers

For a long time, chemotherapy remained the main treatment option for metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC). Over the past year, there have been revolutionary changes associated with the approval of five new drugs aimed at blocking the interaction between the surface protein of T‑lymphocytes PD‑1 and its ligands PD‑L1 and PD‑L2, resulting in the activation of the immune response. It is noteworthy that the anti‑PD‑1 antibody pembrolizumab demonstrated an increase in overall survival relative to chemotherapy in a randomized phase III trial in the second line with mUC. Based on this level 1 evidence pembrolizumab was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Nivolumab (antibody PD‑1) also demonstrated an increase in overall survival compared to historical control and was approved by FDA. Likewise, antibodies targeting PD‑L1, including atezolizumab, durvalumab and avelumab, received accelerated approval from the FDA as the second line of treatment for mUC. Some of these agents are approved in the first line by the results of phase II study (atezolizumab and pembolizumab received accelerated approval for first‑line treatment in patients not receiving cisplatin). Despite these many endorsements, clinical development of new biomarkers for selection of patients, who can get maximum advantages of immunotherapy and also for development the optimal therapy sequencing still are biggest and critical question for future investigation.The clinical introduction of biomarkers to determine optimal treatment of patients remains extremely important.

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

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

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

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document