PALETTE: Final overall survival (OS) data and predictive factors for OS of EORTC 62072/GSK VEG110727, a randomized double-blind phase III trial of pazopanib versus placebo in advanced soft tissue sarcoma (STS) patients.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 10009-10009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Winette T.A. Van Der Graaf ◽  
Jean-Yves Blay ◽  
Sant P. Chawla ◽  
Dong-Wan Kim ◽  
Binh Bui Nguyen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Predictive Factors ◽  
Advanced Disease ◽  
Cox Model ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
Interaction Factor

10009 Background: At ASCO 2011 we presented an increase in median progression-free survival (PFS) of pazopanib of 13 weeks (median 7 to 20 weeks; HR 0.31) in a randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III trial in advanced non-adipocytic STS patients pretreated with chemotherapy. Now we present final OS data and predictive factors for OS, such as ethnicity, ancestry and well-known prognostic and predictive factors in STS patients treated with chemotherapy. Methods: At clinical cut-off median follow-up was 25 months. Comparison of both treatments for OS was performed using a two-sided log rank test stratified for number of prior lines of systemic therapy for advanced disease and WHO performance status (PS). HR was calculated with a 2-sided CI. A Kaplan-Meier OS curve was used. Baseline characteristics as potential predictive factors for OS were: PS (0 vs 1), number of lines of prior therapy for advanced disease (0-1 vs 2+), age (≤55 yrs vs > 55 yrs), gender, ethnicity (Hispano or Latino vs other), geographic ancestry (White Caucasian, Asian, other), tumour grade (1-2 vs 3), histology (leiomyosarcoma vs synovial sarcoma vs other). A Cox model was fitted with the investigated factor, treatment arm and associated interaction factor. Data of all 369 randomized patients (123 placebo, 246 pazopanib) were used for the analyses. Results: Median OS (95% CI) was 10.7 (8.7-12.8) in the placebo versus 12.5 (10.6-14.8) months in the pazopanib group, HR: 0.86 (0.67-1.1). Post study protocol systemic treatment was administered in 63% of placebo, and in 49% of pazopanib treated patients. None of the investigated factors showed any statistical significant predictive value for OS. Conclusions: Although pazopanib demonstrated a statically significant increase in PFS compared to placebo, final OS analysis, which showed a trend in favor of pazopanib in patients with metastatic non-adipocytic STS, did not reach statistical significance. The factors studied were not predictive for OS.

Randomized, double-blind, placebo (PL)-controlled, phase III trial of pimitespib (TAS-116), an oral inhibitor of heat shock protein 90 (HSP90), in patients (pts) with advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) refractory to imatinib (IM), sunitinib (SU) and regorafenib (REG).

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 11524-11524
Author(s):  
Yoshitaka Honma ◽  
Yukinori Kurokawa ◽  
Akira Sawaki ◽  
Yoichi Naito ◽  
Shiro Iwagami ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Failure Time ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Clinical Activity ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Kit Mutation ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
To Receive ◽  
Advanced Gist

11524 Background: Pimitespib (PIM) is a novel class of orally active selective HSP90 inhibitors. KIT and PDGFRA are clients of HSP90 for their functional stability; therefore, HSP90 is a rational therapeutic target on GIST in pts with acquired resistance, such as secondary mutation in KIT, to approved tyrosine kinase inhibitors. A phase II trial showed clinical activity of PIM in pts with advanced GIST refractory to standard treatments whose medical need remains unmet. This phase III trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of PIM for this unmet clinical need. Methods: Eligible pts had histologically confirmed advanced GIST refractory to IM, SU, and REG, ≥1 measurable lesion, and ECOG performance status 0 or 1. Pts were randomized 2:1 to receive either PIM 160 mg once daily on a 5-days-on/ 2-days-off schedule or PL. Pts eligible for unblinding at the time of progressive disease were allowed to crossover to open-label PIM. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) by blinded central radiological review based on modified RECIST 1.1. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), PFS in the pts crossed over to PIM (secondary PFS), and safety. Crossover-adjusted OS was derived using the rank preserving structural failure time (RPSFT) model. Exploratory endpoints included pharmacogenomics (PGx). Results: From Oct 2018 to Apr 2020, 86 pts were randomized to receive either PIM (n = 58) or PL (n = 28). Baseline characteristics were well balanced between the two arms. Median PFS was 2.8 months (mo) (95% CI: 1.6–2.9) for PIM vs. 1.4 mo (95% CI: 0.9–1.8) for PL. The hazard ratio (HR) for PFS was 0.51 (95% CI: 0.30–0.87) ( p = 0.006, stratified log-rank test). Median OS was 13.8 mo (95% CI: 9.2–not reached) for PIM vs. 9.6 mo (95% CI: 5.5–not reached) for PL (HR for OS 0.63; p = 0.081), with 60.7 % of PL pts crossed over to PIM; secondary PFS was 2.7 mo (95% CI: 0.7–4.1). The RPSFT-adjusted median OS of PL was 7.6 mo (adjusted HR for OS 0.42; p = 0.007). Furthermore, the results of PGx analysis suggested that PIM was also effective in pts with secondary KIT mutation detected from blood samples. The most common ( > 5%) grade 3 or higher adverse events (AEs) in PIM/PL were diarrhea (13.8%/0%), anemia (6.9%/10.7%), decreased appetite (6.9%/0%), and tumor hemorrhage (5.2%/0%). AEs leading to PIM/PL study discontinuation were observed in 4/2 pts (6.9%/7.1%), respectively. Conclusions: This randomized trial demonstrated that PIM significantly improved PFS with OS prolongation in pts with advanced GIST refractory to IM, SU, and REG, as a HSP90 inhibitor for the first time. PIM was tolerated and AEs were manageable. With a mechanism of action different from that of standard therapies, PIM has the potential to be a new standard treatment in GIST. Clinical trial information: JapicCTI-184094.

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

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

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

TALAPRO-2: A placebo-controlled phase III study of talazoparib (TALA) plus enzalutamide (ENZA) for patients with first-line metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC).

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS264-TPS264
Author(s):  
Neeraj Agarwal ◽  
Neal D. Shore ◽  
Curtis Dunshee ◽  
Lawrence Ivan Karsh ◽  
Arun Azad ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Parp Inhibitor ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Dose Finding ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Combination Methods

TPS264 Background: TALA is a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor that inhibits PARP1/2 and traps PARP on DNA, preventing DNA damage repair (DDR) and causing death of cells with DDR mutations (eg BRCA1/2). TALA is approved in multiple countries for germline BRCA1/2-mutated HER2- advanced breast cancer. ENZA is an established therapy for CRPC. PARP1 activity has been shown to support AR function, suggesting that co-blockade of PARP1 may synergize with AR-directed therapy, regardless of DDR deficiency. A combination of TALA with ENZA in mCRPC may improve clinical outcomes in patients with or without DDR-deficient tumors. TALAPRO-2 (NCT03395197) is a 2-part study to evaluate efficacy, safety, pharmacokinetics, and patient (pt)-reported outcomes (PROs) of the combination. Methods: Enrollment goal is 1037 pts (19 pts, part 1 dose-finding; 1,018 pts, part 2 placebo-controlled). Key eligibility criteria: age ≥18 y, asymptomatic/mildly symptomatic mCRPC, ECOG performance status ≤1, no brain metastases, and no prior life-prolonging systemic therapy in nonmetastatic CRPC or mCRPC state. Prior docetaxel or novel hormonal therapy (excluding novel AR inhibitors) in castration sensitive (CSPC) setting is allowed. The randomized double-blind portion will evaluate safety, efficacy, and PROs of TALA (0.5 mg QD) + ENZA (160 mg QD) vs placebo + ENZA (160 mg QD). Randomization is stratified by prior NHT or docetaxel for CSPC (yes/no) and DDR mutation status (deficient vs nondeficient/unknown). The primary endpoint is radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS), defined as time to progression in soft tissue per RECIST v.1.1 or in bone per PCWG3 criteria or death. The key secondary endpoint is overall survival (OS). Efficacy will be assessed by radiography every 8 weeks up to week 25 and every 8–12 weeks thereafter. rPFS will be compared between two arms by a 1-sided stratified log-rank test. Pt recruitment is ongoing in multiple regions including US, Europe/Eastern Europe, Israel, South America, South Africa, and Asia Pacific region. This study was sponsored by Pfizer Inc. Clinical trial information: NCT03395197.

Randomized phase III trial of sorafenib in advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC): Impact of crossover on survival

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4524-4524 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Eisen ◽  
R. M. Bukowski ◽  
M. Staehler ◽  
C. Szczylik ◽  
S. Oudard ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Interim Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Secondary Analysis ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Level Of Significance ◽  
Improvement In Survival

4524 Background: Sorafenib was approved for advanced RCC in the USA December 2005. A Phase III randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled trial demonstrated an estimated 39% improvement in survival for patients receiving sorafenib versus placebo (HR= 0.72, p = 0.018) (ECCO 2005). These data supported independently reviewed doubling of PFS to 24 weeks in RCC patients receiving sorafenib compared with placebo (12 weeks) (p < 0.000001) (ASCO 2005). Based on the statistical significance and magnitude of PFS benefit, patients were unblinded and placebo patients allowed to crossover to sorafenib in April 2005. A prospectively planned interim OS analysis reflecting impact of crossover of placebo patients is presented. Methods: OS data up to November 30, 2005, were analyzed in this interim analysis using a stratified log-rank test comparing the two treatment groups. In order to examine the effect of crossover on OS, a secondary analysis was performed censoring data from patients randomized to placebo at June 30, 2005. Results: A total of 903 patients were randomized (451 to sorafenib, 452 to placebo) and >200 placebo patients crossed over to sorafenib. Baseline characteristics were similar between treatment arms. There were 367 deaths. The median OS was 19.3 months for sorafenib versus 15.9 months for placebo (HR = 0.77; 95% CI 0.63, 0.95; p = 0.015); although this did not attain the level of significance specified for the interim analysis (α = 0.009), a continued favorable trend in survival benefit was observed. With censoring of crossover data, the median OS was 19.3 months for sorafenib versus 14.3 months for placebo (HR = 0.74, 95% CI 0.58, 0.93; p = 0.010). Conclusion: Sorafenib is the first novel, oral approved treatment for advanced RCC in more than a decade. Previous information on the effect of crossover on OS in randomized oncology studies is limited. The lower HR observed after censoring placebo patients crossed over to sorafenib suggests a continued beneficial effect of sorafenib. Final results await more mature data. [Table: see text]

A randomized phase III trial of irinotecan plus carboplatin versus etoposide plus carboplatin in patients with small cell lung cancer, extensive disease (SCLC-ED): IRIS-Study

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 7523-7523 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Hermes ◽  
B. Bergman ◽  
R. Bremnes ◽  
L. Ek ◽  
S. Fluge ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Liver Function Tests ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Oral Etoposide ◽  
Phase Iii Trial

7523 Background: A Japanese randomized trial has shown superior survival for SCLC-ED patients receiving irinotecan+cisplatin as compared to etoposide+cisplatin. Our trial was performed to evaluate the effect of irinotecan+carboplatin compared to oral etoposide+carboplatin. Patients and Methods: In a phase III trial, patients with SCLC-ED were randomly assigned to receive carboplatin, AUC=4 (Chatelut formula) and irinotecan, 175 mg/m2, both on day 1 (IC) or carboplatin (Chatelut AUC=4) on day 1 and etoposide 120 mg/m2/day, orally, on days 1–5 (EC). In both arms, courses were repeated on day 21 with 4 cycles planned. Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), secondary endpoints were quality of life, evaluated by EORTC-QLQ-C30 and QLQ-LC 13, and complete response rate. There were neither upper limits for age or performance status. Results: Between November, 2001 and July, 2005, 220 patients were randomized. 210 patients were eligible for analysis (other type of cancer, 8 pts., limited disease, 1 pt., elevated liver function tests, 1 pt.). Performance status (PS) 0: 20 patients, PS 1: 91, PS 2: 62, PS 3: 29, PS 4: 8. Median age IC was 67 years (46–81), EC 67 years (39–82). OS was 255 days (IC) versus 214 days (EC) (P=0.04, log rank test). HR for overall survival was 1.34, 95% CI: 1.01–1.79. 1-year survival was 35% vs 28%. CR was observed in 18 patients in the IC arm and 7 patients in the EC arm (P=0.02, chi-square test). There were no statistically significant differences with respect to haematological grade III-IV toxicity. No severe diarrhea was observed in the IC group. There were no significant differences regarding quality of life. Conclusion: Irinotecan + carboplatin is superior to oral etoposide + carboplatin with respect to overall survival in SCLC-ED. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Dacomitinib versus gefitinib for the first-line treatment of advanced EGFR mutation positive non-small cell lung cancer (ARCHER 1050): A randomized, open-label phase III trial.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. LBA9007-LBA9007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tony Mok ◽  
Ying Cheng ◽  
Xiangdong Zhou ◽  
Ki Hyeong Lee ◽  
Kazuhiko Nakagawa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Egfr Mutation ◽  
Cox Model ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Meaningful Improvement ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Activating Mutation

LBA9007 Background: Dacomitinib is a 2nd generation EGFR TKI with encouraging clinical activity as 1st-line therapy in patients with EGFR-activating mutation positive advanced NSCLC (Jänne, Lancet Oncol 2014). We performed the first randomized phase III trial, currently ongoing, comparing dacomitinib (D) with gefitinib (G) as 1st-line therapy (1L) (NCT01774721). Methods: Patients (pts) with newly diagnosed stage IIIB/IV/ recurrent NSCLC harboring an EGFR- activating mutation (exon 19 del or exon 21 L858R mu +/- exon 20 T790M mu) were randomized 1:1 to D 45 mg PO QD or G 250mg PO QD; stratification was by race and EGFR mutation subtype. The primary endpoint was PFS per blinded independent review (IRC) analyzed by Kaplan-Meier method with log-rank test and Cox model. Secondary endpoints included: overall survival, objective response rate (ORR), duration of response (DR), PFS per Investigator (INV), time to treatment failure (TTF), restricted mean survival time (RMST) for PFS, safety and patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Results: The ITT population included 452 pts with baseline characteristics fairly well balanced between the arms. ORR per IRC was similar between arms (75% [95% CI: 69, 80] for D and 72% [95% CI: 65, 77]; 2-sided p-value = 0.39; OS is not mature. The most commonly reported grade 3 adverse events with dacomitinib were dermatitis acneiform (13.7%) and diarrhea (8.4%) and with gefitinib ALT (8.5%); no new safety signals were identified. Conclusions: ARCHER 1050 was the first phase III head-to-head study of EGFR TKIs and demonstrated statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in efficacy of D vs. G in 1L NSCLC pts with EGFR-activating mutations with a manageable safety profile, to offer a new 1L treatment option. Clinical trial information: NCT01774721. [Table: see text]

TALAPRO-2: a placebo-controlled phase III study of talazoparib (TALA) plus enzalutamide (ENZA) for patients with first-line metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC).

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS5598-TPS5598
Author(s):  
Neeraj Agarwal ◽  
Neal D. Shore ◽  
Curtis Dunshee ◽  
Lawrence Ivan Karsh ◽  
Arun Azad ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Performance Status ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer ◽  
Dna Breaks ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Repair Gene ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Parp Activity

TPS5598 Background: TALA blocks poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) activity and traps PARP on single-strand DNA breaks, preventing DNA damage repair (DDR) and causing death of cells with DDR alterations (eg BRCA1/2).a TALA has been approved in multiple countries as monotherapy for germline BRCA1/2-mutated human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer. ENZA is an androgen receptor (AR) inhibitor and an established therapy for mCRPC. As PARP activity has been shown to support AR function, inhibition of PARP is expected to reduce AR signaling and increase sensitivity to AR-directed therapies. In addition, AR blockade downregulates homologous recombination repair gene transcription which induces ‘ BRCAness ’. Therefore, combining TALA with ENZA in mCRPC may be efficacious regardless of DDR alterations. TALAPRO-2 (NCT03395197) is a Phase III, 2-part study to evaluate efficacy, safety, pharmacokinetics, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of TALA combined with ENZA. Methods: Enrollment goal is 1037 patients (19 patients, part 1 dose-finding; 1,018 patients, part 2 placebo-controlled). Key eligibility criteria: age ≥18 years; asymptomatic/mildly symptomatic mCRPC; ECOG performance status ≤1; metastatic disease (no brain metastases); and no prior life-prolonging systemic therapy for nonmetastatic CRPC or mCRPC. Prior therapies (excluding novel AR inhibitors) in the castration-sensitive (CSPC) setting are allowed. ADT must continue throughout the study. The randomized double-blind portion (part 2) will evaluate safety, efficacy, and PROs of TALA (0.5 mg QD) + ENZA (160 mg QD) vs placebo + ENZA (160 mg QD). Patients are stratified by prior novel hormonal therapy or docetaxel for CSPC (yes or no) and DDR alteration status (deficient vs nondeficient/unknown). The primary endpoint is radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS), defined as time to progression in soft tissue per RECIST v.1.1 or in bone per PCWG3 criteria by independent review or death. The key secondary endpoint is overall survival. Efficacy will be assessed radiographically every 8 weeks up to Week 25 and every 8–12 weeks thereafter. rPFS will be compared between the two arms by a 1-sided stratified log-rank test. Patient recruitment is ongoing in multiple regions including US, Europe/Eastern Europe, Israel, South America, South Africa, and Asia-Pacific region. aDDR alterations are defined as known/likely pathogenic variants or homozygous deletions. Funding: Pfizer Inc. Clinical trial information: NCT03395197 .

PARAMOUNT: Final overall survival (OS) results of the phase III study of maintenance pemetrexed (pem) plus best supportive care (BSC) versus placebo (plb) plus BSC immediately following induction treatment with pem plus cisplatin (cis) for advanced nonsquamous (NS) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. LBA7507-LBA7507 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luis Paz-Ares ◽  
Filippo De Marinis ◽  
Mircea Dediu ◽  
Michael Thomas ◽  
Jean-Louis Pujol ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Maintenance Therapy ◽  
Disease Progression ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Induction Treatment ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Continuation Maintenance

LBA7507 Background: The PARAMOUNT trial showed that pem continuation maintenance therapy significantly reduced the risk of disease progression over plb (HR=0.62; 95% CI: 0.49-0.79; p <0.0001) in patients (pts) with advanced NS NSCLC who had not progressed during pem-cis induction. Here we present the final OS data. Methods: In a double-blind, plb-controlled study, alpha-controlled for OS, 939 pts received induction (4 cycles of pem 500 mg/m2 and cis 75 mg/m2 on d1 of 21d cycles), and 539 pts who had not progressed and had an ECOG performance status (PS) of 0/1 were randomized (2:1) to maintenance pem (500 mg/m2, on day 1 of 21-day cycles) plus BSC or plb plus BSC until disease progression. All received B12, folic acid, and dexamethasone. After 397 deaths, a log-rank test compared OS between arms using anominal α level of 0.0498. Results: Pt characteristics were balanced between arms: median age 61 years; 58% men; 32% PS 0; 95% Caucasian; 86% adenocarcinoma; 45% complete/partial response (CR/PR) to induction. Pem resulted in a statistically significant 22% reduction in risk of death (HR=0.78). The HR was the same when measured from the beginning of induction. Survival improvement was similar for pts with an induction outcome of CR/PR versus stable disease. Conclusions: Pem continuation maintenance therapy offers superior OS compared with plb. These final results confirm that pem-cis induction followed by continuation pem further benefits pts compared with induction therapy alone, offering a change in the treatment paradigm for advanced NS NSCLC. [Table: see text]

Regorafenib (REG) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) progressing following sorafenib: An ongoing randomized, double-blind, phase III trial.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS4163-TPS4163
Author(s):  
Ann-Lii Cheng ◽  
Richard S. Finn ◽  
Masatoshi Kudo ◽  
Josep M. Llovet ◽  
Shukui Qin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systemic Therapy ◽  
Group Performance ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Sorafenib Treatment ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
Ecog Ps

TPS4163 Background: Sorafenib is the accepted first-line systemic therapy for HCC, but no standard option is available for patients with tumor progression following sorafenib. An open-label phase II study suggested that REG, a multikinase inhibitor, had an acceptable safety profile and showed evidence of antitumor activity in patients with progressive HCC (Bolondi et al. Eur J Cancer 2011; 47 [Suppl 1]: abstract 6.576): disease control was achieved in 26/36 patients (72%) and median time to progression (TTP) was 4.3 months; median overall survival (OS) was 13.8 months. On the basis of these promising data, a phase III trial was designed. Methods: This randomized, double-blind, placebo (PBO)-controlled, multinational study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01774344) will assess the efficacy and tolerability of REG vs PBO in patients with HCC that has progressed following sorafenib treatment (target n=530). Inclusion criteria include Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage B or C disease, Child–Pugh A liver function, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) 0 or 1. Patients who discontinued sorafenib ≥8 weeks before study entry or who received other previous systemic therapy for HCC will be excluded. Patients will be randomized in a 2:1 ratio to receive REG 160 mg or matching PBO OD for weeks 1–3 of each 4-week cycle; all patients will also receive best supportive care. Treatment will continue until disease progression, death, intolerable toxicity, or patient/investigator decision to stop. Doses of study drug may be delayed or reduced to manage clinically significant drug-related toxicities. The primary endpoint is OS; secondary endpoints are TTP, progression-free survival, tumor response, and safety. Analysis will be according to randomized group, stratified by geographic region (Asia vs rest of world), ECOG PS (0 vs 1), alfa-fetoprotein level (<400 vs ≥400 ng/ml), extrahepatic disease (yes vs no), and macrovascular invasion (yes vs no). In addition, blood, plasma, and archival tissue will be assessed for pharmacokinetic and biomarker analyses, and health-related quality of life and health utility will be measured. Clinical trial information: NCT01774344.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document