Final skin toxicity (ST) and patient-reported outcomes (PRO) results from PRIME: A randomized phase III study of panitumumab (pmab) plus FOLFOX4 (CT) for first-line metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 531-531 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean Yves Douillard ◽  
Salvatore Siena ◽  
Josep Tabernero ◽  
Ronald L. Burkes ◽  
Mario Edmundo Barugel ◽  
...  

531^ Background: Final PRIME results showed that pmab + CT significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate vs CT alone for first-line wild type (WT) KRAS mCRC. Efficacy and PRO by ST severity from the final descriptive analysis of PRIME are presented. Methods: Patients (pts) had no prior chemotherapy for mCRC, ECOG performance status ≤ 2, and tumor tissue available for biomarker testing. The final analysis occurred 30 months after the last pt was enrolled; the primary endpoint was PFS; secondary endpoints included OS, objective response, and safety. Pts who received treatment and were alive without progression at day 28 were included in the ST analysis. Results: 1183 pts were randomized. 1057 pts with WT or MT KRAS mCRC met the criteria for inclusion in the ST analysis. Maximum grade ST was observed by day 28 in > 50% of pts. Results are shown ( table ). Overall differences in change from baseline of the least square means from a mixed effects model of the EQ-5D Overall Health Rating for pmab + CT (n = 285) minus CT alone (n = 294) and for ST gr 0-1 (n = 53) minus ST gr 2-4 (n = 232) were −1.069 (95% CI: −3.6277 to 1.4896) and 0.8971 (95% CI: ‐4.0224 to 5.8167), respectively. The overall safety profile was broadly comparable across ST groups and treatment arms. Conclusions: Pts with WT KRAS mCRC receiving pmab with ST gr 2-4 had longer PFS and OS vs pts receiving CT alone. PRO were not adversely affected by ST severity. [Table: see text]

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 3620-3620 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean-Yves Douillard ◽  
Salvatore Siena ◽  
Josep Tabernero ◽  
Ronald L. Burkes ◽  
Mario Edmundo Barugel ◽  
...  

3620 Background: The primary and final analyses of PRIME demonstrated that pmab + FOLFOX4 significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) vs FOLFOX4 alone for first-line treatment of patients (pts) with wild-type (WT) KRAS exon 2 mCRC. Methods: Pts were randomized 1:1 to pmab 6.0 mg/kg every 2 weeks + FOLFOX4 or FOLFOX4 alone and had no prior chemotherapy for mCRC, ECOG performance status ≤ 2, and tumor tissue for biomarker testing. The primary endpoint was PFS by central assessment. Secondary endpoints included OS, objective response rate, and safety. KRAS exon 2 tumor status was determined by a blinded central lab prior to the primary analysis. This exploratory analysis of updated survival (>80% OS events) estimated the treatment effect of pmab + FOLFOX4 compared with FOLFOX4 alone on OS by KRAS exon 2 status. Previous analyses in pts with WT KRAS exon 2 tumor status reported OS with an event rate of 54% of pts in the primary analysis and 68% of pts in the final analysis. Results: 1183 pts were randomized and received treatment: 593 pts in the pmab + FOLFOX4 arm and 590 pts in the FOLFOX4 alone arm. The KRAS exon 2 ascertainment rate was 93%, consistent with the primary analysis. 535/656 pts (82%) with WT KRAS exon 2 mCRC had an OS event at the time of this analysis. Results are shown (Table). Conclusions: In this updated analysis, an improvement in OS was observed in pts with WT KRAS exon 2 mCRC treated with pmab + FOLFOX4 vs FOLFOX4 alone (p = 0.03). Median OS was reduced in pts with mutant (MT) KRAS mCRC (p = 0.16) and is consistent with previous analyses. Updated efficacy and safety results will be presented. KRAS testing is critical to select appropriate pts with mCRC for treatment with pmab. Clinical trial information: NCT00364013. [Table: see text]


2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9000-9000
Author(s):  
Martin Reck ◽  
Tudor-Eliade Ciuleanu ◽  
Manuel Cobo ◽  
Michael Schenker ◽  
Bogdan Zurawski ◽  
...  

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]


2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS6589-TPS6589 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lillian L. Siu ◽  
Barbara Burtness ◽  
Ezra E.W. Cohen ◽  
Kevin Joseph Harrington ◽  
Lisa F. Licitra ◽  
...  

TPS6589 Background: The PD-1 inhibitor pembrolizumab is currently approved as first-line monotherapy for patients with R/M HNSCC whose tumors express PD-L1 combined positive score (CPS) ≥1. In a phase 1b/2 trial (NCT02501096) of pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib (multikinase inhibitor of VEGFR 1-3, FGFR 1-4, PDGFRa, RET, and KIT) in solid tumors, the combination demonstrated promising antitumor activity and a manageable safety profile in patients with HNSCC. LEAP-010 (NCT04199104) is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study that will evaluate the efficacy and safety of first-line pembrolizumab with or without lenvatinib in patients with PD-L1–positive R/M HNSCC. Methods: Key eligibility criteria include histologically confirmed R/M HNSCC incurable by local therapies, PD-L1–positive tumor (CPS ≥1) as determined by central laboratory, measurable disease as assessed by blinded independent central review (BICR) per RECIST v1.1, and ECOG performance status (PS) 0 or 1. Patients will be randomly assigned 1:1 to pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib or pembrolizumab plus placebo. Randomization will be stratified by PD-L1 status defined by tumor proportion score ( < 50% vs ≥50%), human papillomavirus status for oropharynx cancer (positive vs negative), and ECOG PS (0 or 1). Patients will receive intravenous pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks for 35 cycles (~2 years) and oral lenvatinib 20 mg or placebo once daily; patients may continue to receive lenvatinib or placebo after pembrolizumab treatment is complete. Treatment will continue until BICR-verified disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Pembrolizumab retreatment (second course) for 17 additional cycles will be allowed for eligible patients who stop pembrolizumab and subsequently experience BICR-verified disease progression. These patients could have stopped treatment with stable disease, partial response, or complete response or after 35 cycles of pembrolizumab for reasons other than disease progression or toxicity. Tumor imaging assessment will be performed at week 6, then every 6 weeks until 1 year, and thereafter every 9 weeks. Primary end points are objective response rate and progression-free survival, assessed by BICR per RECIST v1.1, and overall survival. Secondary end points are duration of response and safety and tolerability. Recruitment is ongoing; planned enrollment is ~500 patients. Clinical trial information: NCT04199104 .


2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (21) ◽  
pp. 3069-3075 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert G. Gish ◽  
Camillo Porta ◽  
Lucian Lazar ◽  
Paul Ruff ◽  
Ronald Feld ◽  
...  

PurposeThe study objective was to compare the overall survival (OS) of patients with unresectable or metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treated with nolatrexed (NOL) or doxorubicin (DOX).Patients and MethodsPatients from North America, Europe, and South Africa (N = 445) with HCC were randomly assigned to receive NOL or DOX. Eligible patients had Karnofsky performance status (KPS) ≥ 60%, Cancer of the Liver Italian Program (CLIP) score ≤ 3, and adequate organ function. Primary end point was OS. Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rates, and safety. The treatment groups were well-balanced with regards to age, sex, ethnic origin, and underlying liver disease. Randomization was stratified according to KPS and CLIP score.ResultsAt the time of the final analysis, 377 patients had died. Median OS was 22.3 weeks for NOL and 32.3 weeks for DOX (P = .0068). The hazard ratio was 0.753 in favor of DOX. Objective response rate (complete response [CR] plus partial response [PR]) was 1.4% for NOL and 4.0% for DOX. Median PFS was 12 weeks for NOL and 10 weeks for DOX (P = .7091). Median time to treatment failure was 8.4 weeks for NOL and 9.1 weeks for DOX (P = .0969). Grade 3 and 4 stomatitis, vomiting, diarrhea, and thrombocytopenia were more common in the NOL arm. Alopecia was more common in the DOX arm. More patients were withdrawn from study for toxicity in the NOL arm than in the DOX arm.ConclusionNOL showed minimal activity in this phase III trial. Further exploration at this dose and schedule in HCC is not warranted.


2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. LBA5007-LBA5007 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Aghajanian ◽  
N. J. Finkler ◽  
T. Rutherford ◽  
D. A. Smith ◽  
J. Yi ◽  
...  

LBA5007 Background: BEV, a humanized anti-VEGF monoclonal antibody, has shown a progression-free survival (PFS) benefit in 2 frontline phase III trials in patients with EOC, PPC and FTC. The therapeutic impact of BEV in combination with carboplatin (C) and gemcitabine (G) followed by single agent BEV to disease progression (PD) was evaluated in this phase III trial in the platinum-sensitive recurrent setting. Methods: Patients had recurrent, platinum-sensitive EOC, PPC or FTC, 1 prior regimen, no prior BEV, ECOG performance status 0-1, measurable disease. Subjects were randomized to: Arm A: [IV C (AUC 4, Day (D) 1) + G (1,000 mg/m2 D1 and 8) + placebo (PL) D1] q21D x 6 cycles (c) → PL q21D until PD or unacceptable toxicity (tox) Arm B: [CG + BEV (15 mg/kg) D1] q21D x 6 c → BEV q21D until PD or tox primary endpoint was investigator assessed PFS (RECIST). Secondary endpoints included objective response (OR), overall survival (OS), duration of response and safety. The design provided 80% power to detect a 27% reduction in the hazard of progression or death in Arm B vs A, limiting the overall type I error of 5%. Results: OCEANS enrolled 484 patients (242 per arm) from 4/07 - 1/10, median follow up of 24 months. BEV plus CG followed by single agent BEV to PD significantly increased PFS compared to CG alone (HR=0.484, p<0.0001). OR increased by 21% (p<0.0001). OS data is immature with only 29% of patients having had an event. The safety profile was consistent with other BEV trials. Conclusions: Results show a statistically significant and clinically relevant benefit when bevacizumab is added to chemotherapy in patients with recurrent, platinum sensitive EOC, PPC, and FTC. This is the first phase III trial of an antiangiogenic to demonstrate a clinical benefit to these patients. [Table: see text]


2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 519-519 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marc Peeters ◽  
Tae Won Kim ◽  
Jin Li ◽  
Stefano Cascinu ◽  
Paul Ruff ◽  
...  

519 Background: The phase 3 ASPECCT trial of pts with chemorefractory WT KRAS exon 2 mCRC demonstrated that pmab was noninferior to cmab for overall survival (OS). A previous subgroup analysis of hazard ratios (HRs) suggested that pts who had received prior bev (any line, at any point before study start) in the pmab arm may have had better outcomes vs pts in the cmab arm (Price, 2014). Methods: Pts were randomized 1:1 to receive pmab or cmab. The subset of pts who had received prior bev were analyzed based on the final analysis of ASPECCT. Results: 999 pts were randomized and treated: 499 pmab and 500 cmab. The prior bev subset included 126 pts in the pmab arm (25%) and 132 pts in the cmab arm (26%). Pts in the pmab arm had longer median OS and progression-free survival (PFS) and higher objective response rates (ORR) compared with pts in the cmab arm. Results are shown (table). After adjustment for baseline covariates including ECOG performance status, number of metastatic sites, and baseline LDH, OS HR was 0.65 (95%CI=0.49-0.85) with pmab vs cmab in pts who had received prior bev. Pts in the pmab and cmab arms who did not receive prior bev had similar OS, PFS, and ORR. Post-progression antitumor therapy was similar between the pmab (47%) and cmab arms (52%) in pts who received prior bev. Conclusions: In ASPECCT, pts with WT KRASexon 2 mCRC who received prior bev-containing regimens may have derived greater benefit with pmab versus cmab monotherapy. Clinical trial information: NCT01001377. [Table: see text]


2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (8) ◽  
pp. 786-793 ◽  
Author(s):  
George D. Demetri ◽  
Margaret von Mehren ◽  
Robin L. Jones ◽  
Martee L. Hensley ◽  
Scott M. Schuetze ◽  
...  

Purpose This multicenter study, to our knowledge, is the first phase III trial to compare trabectedin versus dacarbazine in patients with advanced liposarcoma or leiomyosarcoma after prior therapy with an anthracycline and at least one additional systemic regimen. Patients and Methods Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive trabectedin or dacarbazine intravenously every 3 weeks. The primary end point was overall survival (OS), secondary end points were disease control—progression-free survival (PFS), time to progression, objective response rate, and duration of response—as well as safety and patient-reported symptom scoring. Results A total of 518 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to either trabectedin (n = 345) or dacarbazine (n = 173). In the final analysis of PFS, trabectedin administration resulted in a 45% reduction in the risk of disease progression or death compared with dacarbazine (median PFS for trabectedin v dacarbazine, 4.2 v 1.5 months; hazard ratio, 0.55; P < .001); benefits were observed across all preplanned subgroup analyses. The interim analysis of OS (64% censored) demonstrated a 13% reduction in risk of death in the trabectedin arm compared with dacarbazine (median OS for trabectedin v dacarbazine, 12.4 v 12.9 months; hazard ratio, 0.87; P = .37). The safety profiles were consistent with the well-characterized toxicities of both agents, and the most common grade 3 to 4 adverse effects were myelosuppression and transient elevation of transaminases in the trabectedin arm. Conclusion Trabectedin demonstrates superior disease control versus conventional dacarbazine in patients who have advanced liposarcoma and leiomyosarcoma after they experience failure of prior chemotherapy. Because disease control in advanced sarcomas is a clinically relevant end point, this study supports the activity of trabectedin for patients with these malignancies.


2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 5018-5018
Author(s):  
N. M. Hahn ◽  
W. M. Stadler ◽  
R. T. Zon ◽  
D. M. Waterhouse ◽  
J. Picus ◽  
...  

5018 Background: Despite CG therapy, most metastatic UC patients die from their disease. Novel approaches are needed. Combining anti-angiogenic therapy with chemotherapy has improved outcomes in other malignancies, offering hope for similar improvements in UC patients. Methods: Metastatic or unresectable chemonaive UC patients (pts) with an ECOG performance status of 0–1 received C 70 mg/m2 iv d1, G 1,000–1,250 mg/m2 iv d1, 8, and B 15 mg/kg iv d1 on a q21d cycle for up to 8 cycles. Gemcitabine was reduced to 1,000 mg/m2 iv d1, 8 for all subsequent pts after 7 thromboembolic events were noted in the first 17 pts. The primary endpoint was progression free survival (PFS). The trial was designed to detect a 33% improvement in PFS from 7.5 months with traditional CG therapy to 11.25 months with CGB. Results: By December 2008, 45 pts were enrolled, with 43 evaluable for toxicity, 36 for response. Demographics include: 33 (77%) male, 10 (23%) female; median age 66 (Range: 41 - 78); 26 (60%) and 17 (40%) ECOG 0/1; 19 (44%) and 24 (56%) lymph node only / visceral metastases. PFS will be evaluated in May 2009 when all pts will have more than 6 month follow-up data. 14 (33%) and 6 (14%) pts experienced grade 3 or 4 hematologic toxicity (4 pts - thrombocytopenia, 2 pts - neutropenic fever). Grade 3 or 4 nonhematologic toxicity was observed in 24 (56%) and 9 (21%) pts (DVT/PE - 9 pts, CNS hemorrhage/proteinuria/hypertension - 1 pt each) Best RECIST response was: complete response 6 pts (17%, 95% CI 6–33%), partial response 18 pts (50%, 95% CI 33–67%); with overall response rate of 67% (95% CI 51–82%). Stable disease lasting at least 12 weeks was observed in 10 pts (28%, 95% CI 14–45%) and progressive disease in 2 pts (5%, 95% CI 1–19%). Conclusions: CGB demonstrates significant clinical activity in the first-line treatment of metastatic UC patients at the expense of considerable toxicity. The durability of disease control will be determined by assessment of PFS. A phase III trial to further define the toxicity risk vs. clinical benefit of bevacizumab addition to platinum-based doublets is planned in this population. [Table: see text]


2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 5502-5502 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andres Cervantes-Ruiperez ◽  
Paul Hoskins ◽  
Ignace Vergote ◽  
Elizabeth A. Eisenhauer ◽  
Prafull Ghatage ◽  
...  

5502 Background: Topotecan was evaluated in a novel combination regimen in comparison to standard therapy in front-line EOC. Methods: Women with newly diagnosed advanced EOC stages IIB-IV, ECOG performance status (PS) 0-1, age < 75, were randomized to either Arm 1: cycles 1 - 4: cisplatin 50 mg/m2 d1 plus topotecan 0.75 mg/m2 d1-5 IV; cycles 5 - 8: paclitaxel 175 mg/m2over 3 hrs d1 followed by carboplatin AUC5 day 1 or Arm 2: paclitaxel plus carboplatin as in Arm 1 for 8 cycles. The primary endpoint was progression free survival (PFS) and secondary endpoints included objective response, overall survival (OS), adverse event (AE) and Quality of Life (QoL). The sample size required 800 pts and 631 events to detect an improvement in PFS from 16 to 20 months (power 80%, 2-sided alpha 0.05). Results with 3.6 years median follow-up (MFU) were reported previously: there was no significant difference in PFS (Hoskins P, JNCI 2010). Final results including OS after MFU of 8.2 years are reported. Results: From 2001 to 2005, 819 pts (409 Arm 1, 410 Arm 2) were randomized. 704 PFS events and 605 deaths have occurred. PFS results are similar to first report: Median (months [mo]): 14.6 (Arm 1) and 16.2 (Arm 2), hazard ratio (HR) 1.03 (95% CI:0.81-1.30; p = 0.83). Median OS is 44.2 mo (Arm 1) and 44.8 mo (Arm 2), HR: 0.92 (95% CI:0.71-1.19; p=0.54). Baseline factors found to be independent predictors of OS in multivariate analysis are: a) pre-randomization surgery (debulking with no macro residual disease (MRD) to no debulking HR: 0.47; 95%CI:0.37-0.58; p < 0.0001; debulking with MRD (<1 cm) to no debulking HR: 0.76; 95%CI:0.61-0.94; p = 0.01), b) Stage (stage II to III or IV HR:0.52; 95%CI:0.36-0.76; p = 0.0007) and c) PS (0 vs 1 HR:0.76; 95%CI:0.63-0.91; p = 0.004). Post-treatment AEs were not significantly different in the two arms. Conclusions: OV16 final results confirm that sequential doublets of topotecan and cisplatin followed by carboplatin and paclitaxel offer no improvement in outcomes compared to carboplatin and paclitaxel. Pretreatment debulking, stage II and PS 0 are predictive of longer OS. Clinical trial information: NCT00028743.


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 ◽  
...  

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.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document