Vinflunine maintenance therapy versus best supportive care (BSC) after platinum combination in advanced bladder cancer: A phase II, randomized, open-label study (MAJA study)—SOGUG 2011-02.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS4674-TPS4674
Author(s):  
Sonia Maciá ◽  
Jesus Garcia-Donas ◽  
Albert Font Pous ◽  
Montserrat Domenech ◽  
Xavier Garcia del Muro ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bladder Cancer ◽  
Transitional Cell ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Best Supportive Care ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Microtubule Inhibitor ◽  
Translational Study ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Radiological Response

TPS4674 Background: Vinflunine is a novel microtubule inhibitor currently approved by EMA as treatment after platinum progression, in metastasic bladder cancer. It is distinguished from the other vinca-alkaloids because it binds relatively weakly to tubulin, suggesting an improved tolerance profile as a result of less neuropathy. Based on the fact that no cumulative toxicity is expected and the results reported in second-line, we aim to test the role of vinflunine in first line therapy, as maintenance treatment for patients who obtain clinical benefit after platinum. Methods: This is a multicenter, randomized, open label, proof-of-concept study that will be performed in 20 institutions members of the Spanish Oncology Genitourinary Group (SOGUG). Subjects will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive vinflunine 320 mg/m2 every 21 days plus BSC vs BSC alone until disease progression. Vinflunine dose will be 280mg/m2 for patients with PS=1, age ≥ 75 years, prior pelvic radiotherapy or creatinine clearance Cr <60ml/min. Stratification factors are: 1) Scheduled dose at randomization (320 vs 280mg/m2) 2) Liver metastasis (Y/N). Main inclusion criteria are: Subjects ≥18 and< 80 years of age with histological diagnosis of transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelial tract and measurable disease with radiological response or stabilization after 6 cycles of a platinum containing doublet for metastasic/advanced disease. Primary objective will be progression free survival (PFS), considering as clinically relevant 6 months in experimental arm. To guarantee an overall type-1 α error (one side) no greater than 0.05 and a type II (β) error 0.1 for the primary endpoint of PFS, a sample size of 86 patients allocated in a 1:1 ratio is planned. Recruitment is scheduled to start by February 2012. A pharmacogenomic translational study will also be conducted.

Vinflunine maintenance therapy versus best supportive care after platinum combination in advanced bladder cancer: A phase II, randomized, open label, study (MAJA study, SOGUG 2011-02)—Interim analysis on safety.

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 359-359 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susana Hernando Polo ◽  
Aranzazu Gonzalez del Alba ◽  
Begoña Perez-Valderrama ◽  
José Carlos Villa Guzman ◽  
Miguel Angel Climent ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bladder Cancer ◽  
Supportive Care ◽  
Interim Analysis ◽  
Primary Tumour ◽  
Transitional Cell ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Best Supportive Care ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Microtubule Inhibitor

359 Background: Vinflunine (VFL) is a novel microtubule inhibitor currently approved by EMA as treatment after platinum progression, in metastasic bladder cancer. We evaluated whether maintenance vinflunine delays progression after response to CT. Methods: Multicenter, randomized, open label, proof-of-concept study that is being performed in 21 institutions members of the Spanish Oncology Genitourinary Group (SOGUG). Subjects are randomized to receive (arm A) VFL 320 mg/m2 (280mg/m2 for patients with PS=1, age ≥ 75 years, prior pelvic radiotherapy or creatinine clearance Cr <60ml/min) every 21 days plus best supportive care (BSC) vs. (arm B) BSC alone until disease progression. Main inclusion criteria: Subjects ≥18 and< 80 years of age with histological diagnosis of transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelial tract and measurable disease whith radiological response or stabilization after 4 to 6 cy of a cisplatin-containing doublet for metastasic/advanced disease (carboplatin allowed on cy 5-6). Primary objective: progression free survival (PFS). A sample size of 86 patients allocated in a 1:1 ratio is planned. Recruitment started on April 2012. A pharmacogenomic translational study will be conducted. Results: To September 2013, 46 pts have been enrolled, 20 in the VFL+BSC group, 26 in the BSC group. We present the results of the interim analysis including data from first 25 patients who have completed at least 2 cycles. Median age 65.6 years (range 54-77); PS 0/1, 44%/56%; CrCl <60 ml/min 16%; liver metastasis 16%; prior pelvic RT 8%. Primary tumour location: bladder 76%, upper urinary tract 20%, urethra 4%. Pure transitional cells 84%. Metastatic/locoregional disease, 72% / 28%. We analyzed 63 cy in the chemotherapy arm. Most common G3/4 (% cycles) AEs on vinflunine were constipation (12.7%), neutropenia (7.9%), fatigue (4.8%), myalgia (3.2%). One death was reported due to dyspnea, not related to the treatment. No febrile neutropenia was reported at the time of the analysis. Conclusions: Maintenance with vinflunine presented an acceptable security profile leading to trial continuation. Clinical trial information: 2011-001271-39.

scholarly journals Oral vinorelbine and cisplatin as first-line therapy for advanced squamous NSCLC patients: a prospective randomized international phase II study (NAVoTrial 03)

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 ◽  
pp. 175883592110229
Author(s):  
Francesco Grossi ◽  
Piotr Jaśkiewicz ◽  
Marion Ferreira ◽  
Grzegorz Czyżewicz ◽  
Dariusz Kowalski ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase Ii ◽  
Phase Ii Study ◽  
Current Knowledge ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Comparable Efficacy ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Oral Vinorelbine ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Nsclc Patients

Objective: The study investigated the efficacy and safety of oral vinorelbine-cisplatin (OV-CDDP) and gemcitabine-cisplatin (GEM-CDDP) in patients with squamous non-small cell lung cancer (sq-NSCLC). Patients and methods: This was an open-label, prospective, multicenter, international phase II study that enrolled untreated patients with advanced sq-NSCLC. Patients were randomized to receive 3-week cycles of either 60–80 mg/m2 OV days 1 and 8 in combination with 80 mg/m2 CDDP day 1 (arm A) or 1250 mg/m2 GEM days 1 and 8 in combination with 75 mg/m2 CDDP day 1 (arm B). After four cycles, patients without disease progression continued maintenance dose of OV or GEM until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary objective was disease control rate (DCR). Secondary objectives included progression-free survival (PFS), time to treatment failure (TTF), overall survival (OS), safety, and quality of life (QoL). Results: A total of 114 patients with sq-NSCLC were randomized, and 113 were treated (57 in arm A and 56 in arm B). DCR was high in both arms: 73.7% (95%CI: 62.4–100.0) in arm A and 75.0% (95%CI: 63.7–100.0) in arm B. Median PFS and TTF were similar in arm A and B 4.2 and 2.8 months, and 4.3 and 3.1 months, respectively. Even though the difference was not significant, the OS was 10.2 for arm A and 8.4 months for arm B. The safety profiles were consistent with the current knowledge of adverse events. QoL results revealed an improvement in patients under OV treatment. Conclusion: The OV-CDDP combination showed comparable efficacy to GEM-CDDP with acceptable safety profile and enhanced patients’ QoL. Trial registration: The study was registered under EudraCT number 2012-003531-40.

Clinical update on the SHELTER study: A phase I/II trial of the HDAC inhibitor resminostat in patients with sorafenib-resistant hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 275-275 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Bitzer ◽  
M. Horger ◽  
T. Ganten ◽  
M. P. Ebert ◽  
M. A. Woerns ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hdac Inhibitor ◽  
Rest Period ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Oral Drug ◽  
Open Label ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Parallel Group ◽  
Term Tolerability ◽  
Dose Levels

275 Background: Resminostat (4SC-201) is a novel oral pan-HDAC inhibitor in clinical development in a variety of cancer indications. The aim of the SHELTER study is to evaluate safety, tolerability, and efficacy in patients (pts) with HCC exhibiting progressive disease under sorafenib first-line therapy. Methods: Sorafenib-refractory pts with advanced HCC, BCLC B or C are included in a multicenter, open-label, two-arm parallel group trial. Resminostat is administered orally on three dose levels of 200 (DL1), 400 (DL2), and 600 mg (DL3) once daily, in combination with 400 mg sorafenib (arm A) or as mono therapy (600 mg, arm B). For arm A, a precedent dose escalation of resminostat and sorafenib is performed to determine the MTD. Resminostat is administered in a “5+9” dosing schedule, consisting of 5 consecutive treatment days (D1-5) followed by a 9-day rest period resulting in 14 day cycles. In arm A sorafenib is given twice daily throughout the treatment period. Primary objective is to determine progression-free survival rate after 12 weeks (6 cycles). Secondary objectives include safety and tolerability, tumor response, estimation of TTP, OS, assessment of PK, and biomarkers. Results: To date, 14 pts were treated either with 600 mg resminostat alone or on DL1-3 in combination with 400 mg sorafenib. The majority of AE observed so far include gastrointestinal disorders such as nausea and vomiting. Plasma exposure to resminostat increased dose-dependently on D1 (cycle 1) with mean AUC 0-6 h values of 10.5 h*mg/L (600 mg mono) and 9.01 h*mg/L (DL3). No major changes in PK characteristics of resminostat were found with or without co-administration of sorafenib. A considerable portion of patients showed stabilization of their disease (SD): 9 out of 12 pts and 4 out of 5 pts examined after 6 and 12 weeks, respectively, displayed SD. In one patient treated on DL2, SD persisted for 36 weeks along with good long-term tolerability. Conclusions: Preliminary clinical data confirmed the favorable oral drug profile of resminostat either in mono or in combination treatment with sorafenib. Initial data on therapeutic activity to overcome resistance to sorafenib are promising. [Table: see text]

Investigation of the HDAC inhibitor resminostat in patients with sorafenib-resistant hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC): Clinical data from the phase I/II SHELTER study.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 262-262 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Bitzer ◽  
Marius Horger ◽  
Tom M Ganten ◽  
Jens T Siveke ◽  
Marcus A Woerns ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Data ◽  
Hdac Inhibitor ◽  
Rest Period ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Open Label ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Parallel Group ◽  
Term Tolerability ◽  
Grade 3

262 Background: Resminostat (4SC-201), an oral pan-HDAC inhibitor, is in clinical development in a variety of cancer indications. The SHELTER study aims to evaluate safety, tolerability and efficacy in HCC patients (pts) exhibiting progressive disease under sorafenib first-line therapy. Methods: Pts with advanced HCC, (BCLC B or C) are included in a multi-center, open-label, two-arm parallel group trial. Radiologic progression under sorafenib is determined acc. to RECIST by central review prior to study entry. For Arm A, dose escalation of resminostat and sorafenib is performed to determine the MTD. Resminostat is administered orally once-daily in a “5+9” schedule, consisting of 5 consecutive treatment days followed by a 9-day rest period resulting in 14 day cycles on dose levels of 200 (DL1), 400 (DL2) and 600 mg (DL3+4), either combined with continuously taken sorafenib at 400 (DL1-3) or 800 mg (DL4) (Arm A), or as resminostat monotherapy (600 mg, Arm B). Primary objective is to determine progression-free survival after 12 weeks (w) (6 cycles). Secondary objectives include safety, tolerability, tumor response, TTP, OS, PK, biomarkers. Results: To date, 39 pts were treated with 600 mg resminostat alone or on DL1-4 in combination with sorafenib. Up to now, no DLT occurred in 5 pts treated on DL4. Most frequently AE observed include CTC grade 1-2 gastrointestinal complaints such as nausea and vomiting and skin disorders like rash, pruritus and HFSR. CTC Grade 3-4 toxicity documented in SAE reports consisted mainly of no-hematological events and was mostly related to the tumor disease. Interim results revealed that 15 out of 27 pts (56%) assessed after 6 w of treatment, and 11 out of 24 pts after 12 w displayed SD. In one patient treated on DL2, SD persisted for more than 1 year along with good long-term tolerability. Conclusions: Preliminary clinical data show a favorable drug profile of resminostat either in mono or in combination treatment with sorafenib. No DLT was observed on the highest DL of the combination therapy up to now. Initial data on toxicity and therapeutic activity to overcome resistance to sorafenib are promising and will be updated for the meeting.

scholarly journals Phase II Randomized Trial Comparing Sequential First-Line Everolimus and Second-Line Sunitinib Versus First-Line Sunitinib and Second-Line Everolimus in Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (25) ◽  
pp. 2765-2772 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert J. Motzer ◽  
Carlos H. Barrios ◽  
Tae Min Kim ◽  
Silvia Falcon ◽  
Thomas Cosgriff ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Renal Cell ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Therapy

Purpose A multicenter, randomized phase II trial, RECORD-3, was conducted to compare first-line everolimus followed by sunitinib at progression with the standard sequence of first-line sunitinib followed by everolimus in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Patients and Methods RECORD-3 used a crossover treatment design. The primary objective was to assess progression-free survival (PFS) noninferiority of first-line everolimus compared with first-line sunitinib. Secondary end points included combined PFS for each sequence, overall survival (OS), and safety. Results Of 471 enrolled patients, 238 were randomly assigned to first-line everolimus followed by sunitinib, and 233 were randomly assigned to first-line sunitinib followed by everolimus. The primary end point was not met; the median PFS was 7.9 months for first-line everolimus and 10.7 months for first-line sunitinib (hazard ratio [HR], 1.4; 95% CI, 1.2 to 1.8). Among patients who discontinued first-line, 108 (45%) crossed over from everolimus to second-line sunitinib, and 99 (43%) crossed over from sunitinib to second-line everolimus. The median combined PFS was 21.1 months for sequential everolimus then sunitinib and was 25.8 months for sequential sunitinib then everolimus (HR, 1.3; 95% CI, 0.9 to 1.7). The median OS was 22.4 months for sequential everolimus and then sunitinib and 32.0 months for sequential sunitinib and then everolimus (HR, 1.2; 95% CI, 0.9 to 1.6). Common treatment-emergent adverse events during first-line everolimus or sunitinib were stomatitis (53% and 57%, respectively), fatigue (45% and 51%, respectively), and diarrhea (38% and 57%, respectively). Conclusion Everolimus did not demonstrate noninferiority compared with sunitinib as a first-line therapy. The trial results support the standard treatment paradigm of first-line sunitinib followed by everolimus at progression.

scholarly journals Favorable Outcome in Patients with Pheochromocytoma and Paraganglioma Treated with 177Lu-DOTATATE

Cancers ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (7) ◽  
pp. 909 ◽  
Author(s):  
Achyut Ram Vyakaranam ◽  
Joakim Crona ◽  
Olov Norlén ◽  
Dan Granberg ◽  
Ulrike Garske-Román ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Evaluation Criteria ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Favorable Outcome ◽  
First Line ◽  
Ki 67 ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Radiological Response ◽  
Low Toxicity ◽  
Grade 3

Peptide receptor radiotherapy (PRRT) with 177Lu-DOTATATE has emerged as a promising therapy for neuroendocrine tumors (NETs). This retrospective cohort study aimed to assess the outcome of PRRT for 22 patients with histopathologically confirmed pheochromocytoma (PCC) and paraganglioma (PGL), of which two were localized and 20 metastatic. Radiological response utilized response evaluation criteria in solid tumors 1.1 and toxicity was graded according to common terminology criteria for adverse events version 4. Median 4 (range 3–11) 7.4 GBq cycles of 177Lu-DOTATATE were administered as first-line therapy (n = 13) or because of progressive disease (n = 9). Partial response (PR) was achieved in two and stable disease (SD) in 20 patients. The median overall survival (OS) was 49.6 (range 8.2–139) months and median progression-free survival (PFS) was 21.6 (range 6.7–138) months. Scintigraphic response >50% was achieved in 9/19 (47%) patients. Biochemical response (>50% decrease) of chromogranin A was found in 6/15 (40%) patients and of catecholamines in 3/12 (25%) patients. Subgroup analysis showed Ki-67 <15% associated with longer OS (p = 0.013) and PFS (p = 0.005). PRRT as first-line therapy was associated with increased OS (p = 0.041). No hematological or kidney toxicity grade 3–4 was registered. 177Lu-DOTATATE therapy was associated with favorable outcome and low toxicity. High Ki-67 (≥15%) and PRRT received because of progression on previous therapy could constitute negative predictive factors for OS.

Preliminary phase II study results of capecitabine (X) + irinotecan (I) + bevacizumab (A) as first-line therapy for patients (pts) with metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC)

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 14502-14502
Author(s):  
S. Beslija ◽  
M. Banjin ◽  
S. Jungic ◽  
N. Obralic ◽  
G. Kecman-Malcic ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Disease Stage ◽  
First Line ◽  
Open Label ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Study Results

14502 Background: The oral fluoropyrimidine X (Xeloda®) has improved efficacy, safety and convenience compared with 5-FU/LV in MCRC [Van Cutsem et al. Br J Cancer 2004] and early-stage colon cancer [Twelves et al. NEJM 2005]. A recent study showed that I + X q2w is active and well tolerated [Garcia-Alfonso et al. ESMO 2006]. The humanized monoclonal antibody A (Avastin®) targets VEGF and limits tumor angiogenesis. The addition of A to 5-FU/LV/I (IFL regimen) results in significant improvements in survival among pts with MCRC [Hurwitz et al. NEJM 2004]. Replacing 5-FU/LV with X in this combination is a logical step forward. Here we report data from an open-label phase II trial of XIA in MCRC. Methods: Pts with untreated, histologically confirmed MCRC received I 175 mg/m2 i.v. d1, X 1000 mg/m2 orally bid d2–8, and A 5 mg/m2 d1. Treatment was repeated q2w x12 cycles in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Pts without progressive disease after 12 cycles of XIA continued on the same dose of A + X 1500 mg/m2 bid d2–8, q2w. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary endpoints were response rate (RECIST), overall survival (OS), safety, and quality of life. Results: 24 out of a planned total of 32 pts have been enrolled. Baseline characteristics are: M/F 50%/50%; median age 53 years (range 30–70); disease stage at initial diagnosis IIIA/IIIB/IV 29%/21%/50%; no. of metastatic sites 1/>1 50%/50%; most common metastatic site liver; prior adjuvant therapy 33% (Mayo 5-FU/LV). Pts received a median of 12 cycles (range 1–18) of XIA. All 24 pts are evaluable for safety and 22 for efficacy. The overall response rate is 77% (4 CR, 13 PR); 2 pts (9%) have stable disease and 3 have progressed. One pt has died. Median PFS and median OS have not yet been reached. The only grade 3 adverse events are diarrhea (13%), fatigue (4%), mucositis (4%), enteritis (4%), ileus (4%); there is one report of grade 4 leucopenia. All other adverse events are mild-to-moderate. Conclusions: The XIA combination appears to be highly active and well tolerated as first-line treatment for MCRC, providing support for further evaluation of this combination. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Dasatinib 50 mg or 70 mg BID compared to 100 mg or 140 mg QD in patients with CML in chronic phase (CP) who are resistant or intolerant to imatinib: One-year results of CA180034

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 7004-7004 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. P. Shah ◽  
D. W. Kim ◽  
H. M. Kantarjian ◽  
P. Rousselot ◽  
P. E. Dorlhiac-Llacer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Kinase Inhibitor ◽  
Chronic Phase ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Response Rates ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Molecular Response ◽  
Duration Of Treatment ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
One Year

7004 Background: Previous data with dasatinib (SPRYCEL®), a short-acting oral multitargeted kinase inhibitor of BCR-ABL and SRC family kinases, have shown the safety and efficacy of the 70 mg BID dose in CP-CML patients. Surprisingly, phase-I data (NEJM 2006;354:2531) demonstrated complete hematologic (CHR) and major cytogenetic responses (MCyR) among CP-CML patients at total daily doses (TDD) of 100 mg and 140 mg in both the BID and QD schedule, despite the achievement of only transient inhibition of BCR-ABL by dasatinib when administered once daily. Methods: Patients with CP-CML resistant or intolerant to imatinib were randomized to one of 4 dasatinib arms: 1) 100 mg QD; 2) 50 mg BID; 3) 140 mg QD; 4) 70 mg BID. In this randomized, prospective, open-label trial, the primary objective compared the CyR rate among the BID and QD arms. Secondary objectives included comparison of the CyR rate between TTDs of 100 and 140 mg and the safety among the 4 arms. Results: 662 patients were randomized from July 2005 to March 2006 and received treatment. Response rates, with a median duration of treatment of 8 months, are shown below. Duration of CyR and progression-free survival were similar across all 4 arms. There was significantly less grade (Gr) 3–4 neutropenia (P=0.035), thrombocytopenia (P=0.001), anemia (P=0.032), and pleural effusions (P=0.028) in the 100-mg QD arm compared to the other 3 arms combined. No differences were seen across the 4 arms in the rates of other adverse events. There were fewer interruptions and reductions and the least number of patients discontinuing treatment for drug-related toxicity in the 100-mg QD arm. Conclusions: Dasatinib 100 mg QD offers the most favorable benefit-risk ratio in CP-CML. This trial provides the first evidence that intermittent kinase inhibition can achieve deep clinical remissions and is associated with an improved safety profile. One-year follow-up on all subjects, molecular response rates, and BCR-ABL mutation data will be presented. [Table: see text] [Table: see text]

Disease stabilization (SD) as a surrogate end-point in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients treated with erlotinib (E) or gefitinib (G)

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 18115-18115 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Pronzato ◽  
M. Loprevite ◽  
A. Brianti ◽  
C. Defferrari ◽  
G. Catania ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Retrospective Study ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Pooled Data ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Mutational Status ◽  
Best Response ◽  
Open Label Phase ◽  
Disease Stabilization ◽  
Nsclc Patients

18115 Background: One retrospective study (Hotta K, Ann Oncol 2005), investigating the prognosis of patients (pts) obtaining SD as best response with G treatment, has demonstrated that both progression-free survival (PFS) and survival (S) were significantly longer than those in pts with progressive disease (PD). The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the PFS and S outcome in pts with advanced NSCLC who achieved SD or partial response (PR) after treatment with E or G. Methods: Pooled data from 62 pts, entered into an open label phase II program of E (n=31) and a compassionate-use program of G (n=31), were retrospectively analyzed. E and G were given orally at 150 and 250 mg per day respectively and were continued until disease progression, development of unacceptable toxicity or patient’s refusal. Results: Pts characteristics: median age 69 years (42–85); females= 21 pts (34%); never/former smokers= 16/38 pts (26/61%); adenocarcinoma/BAC= 35/10 pts (56/16%); PS 0/1= 18/38 pts (29/61%). In 16 pts (26%) E or G were given as first-line therapy; 21 pts (34%) had received =2 prior lines of chemotherapy. Six pts (10%) achieved a PR and 18 pts (29%) obtained SD. TTP and OS in pts obtaining PR and SD were comparable: 7 vs 5.5 and 9.7 vs 9.1 months respectively. In progressing pts median TTP and OS were 1.7 and 3.7 months. Conclusions: Our findings indicate the importance of achieving disease control with both E and G treatment. Pts obtaining SD had a similar PFS and S compared with those having PR. An analysis of the role of mutational status and other biomarkers in predicting clinical outcome is currently underway. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

SELECT: Randomized phase III study of docetaxel (D) or pemetrexed (P) with or without cetuximab (C) in recurrent or progressive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after platinum-based therapy.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 7502-7502 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward S. Kim ◽  
Marcus A. Neubauer ◽  
Allen Lee Cohn ◽  
Lee Steven Schwartzberg ◽  
Lawrence E. Garbo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Objective Response ◽  
Growth Factor Receptor ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Staining Intensity ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Duration Of Response ◽  
Independent Review ◽  
Secondary Endpoints

7502 Background: SELECT investigated whether the addition of C to standard chemotherapy improved progression-free survival (PFS) in patients (pts) with recurrent or progressive NSCLC after failure of platinum-based therapy. Methods: SELECT was a multicenter, open label, randomized phase III trial. Per investigator choice, pts received either P (500 mg/m2) or D (75 mg/m2) on day 1 and then were randomized within each group to chemotherapy plus C (400/250 mg/m2) (initial/weekly) or chemotherapy alone. Therapy was given for up to six 3-week cycles; pts randomized to C continued weekly monotherapy until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary objective was PFS for PC vs. P as determined by an Independent Review Committee (IRC). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR) and duration of response (DOR) by IRC, and safety. Preplanned subgroup analyses for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) staining intensity by immunohistochemistry and histology were performed. Results for PC vs. P only are presented. Results: Between Jan 2005 and Feb 2010, 938 total pts were randomized. Baseline demographics were comparable between PC (n=301) and P (n=304): median age 64 years; male 60%; Caucasian 88%; KPS 80-100/60-70 84%/16%; squamous/non-squamous 24%/76%. Median PFS (months) PC: 2.89 and P: 2.76 (hazard ratio [HR] =1.03 [95% confidence interval (CI)=0.87-1.21]; p=0.76). Median OS (months) PC: 6.93 and P: 7.79 (HR=1.01 [95% CI=0.86-1.20]; p=0.86). ORR PC: 6.6% and P: 4.3% (odds ratio =1.59 [95% CI=0.78-3.26]; p=0.20). Median DOR (months) PC: 4.17 and P: 6.93 (HR=1.58 [95% CI=0.74-3.36]; p=0.24). There were no statistical differences in efficacy based on histology or EGFR staining intensity. More drug-related AEs/SAEs were observed in the PC arm, with differences mainly attributable to skin toxicities, GI (diarrhea/stomatitis), and hypomagnesemia. Conclusions: The addition of C to P did not improve efficacy in this pt population. Further biomarker analyses are planned. The safety profiles for C and P were consistent with existing data and no new safety signals were observed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document