scholarly journals Everolimus for Previously Treated Advanced Gastric Cancer: Results of the Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase III GRANITE-1 Study

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (31) ◽  
pp. 3935-3943 ◽  
Author(s):  
Atsushi Ohtsu ◽  
Jaffer A. Ajani ◽  
Yu-Xian Bai ◽  
Yung-Jue Bang ◽  
Hyun-Cheol Chung ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Advanced Gastric Cancer ◽  
Safety Profile ◽  
Systemic Chemotherapy ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Hazard Ratio ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Previously Treated

Purpose The oral mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor everolimus demonstrated promising efficacy in a phase II study of pretreated advanced gastric cancer. This international, double-blind, phase III study compared everolimus efficacy and safety with that of best supportive care (BSC) in previously treated advanced gastric cancer. Patients and Methods Patients with advanced gastric cancer that progressed after one or two lines of systemic chemotherapy were randomly assigned to everolimus 10 mg/d (assignment schedule: 2:1) or matching placebo, both given with BSC. Randomization was stratified by previous chemotherapy lines (one v two) and region (Asia v rest of the world [ROW]). Treatment continued until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. Primary end point was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate, and safety. Results Six hundred fifty-six patients (median age, 62.0 years; 73.6% male) were enrolled. Median OS was 5.4 months with everolimus and 4.3 months with placebo (hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.75 to 1.08; P = .124). Median PFS was 1.7 months and 1.4 months in the everolimus and placebo arms, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.78). Common grade 3/4 adverse events included anemia, decreased appetite, and fatigue. The safety profile was similar in patients enrolled in Asia versus ROW. Conclusion Compared with BSC, everolimus did not significantly improve overall survival for advanced gastric cancer that progressed after one or two lines of previous systemic chemotherapy. The safety profile observed for everolimus was consistent with that observed for everolimus in other cancers.

Phase III trial of everolimus (EVE) in previously treated patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC): GRANITE-1.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. LBA3-LBA3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Van Cutsem ◽  
Kun-Huei Yeh ◽  
Yung-Jue Bang ◽  
Lin Shen ◽  
Jaffer A. Ajani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systemic Chemotherapy ◽  
Study Drug ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Best Supportive Care ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Common Grade ◽  
Previously Treated ◽  
Grade 3

LBA3 Background: The prognosis for patients with AGC after failure of first-line chemotherapy is poor. Currently, there is no level 1 evidence established for second-line treatment. EVE inhibits the PI3K/Akt/mTOR pathway, a key regulator of cell proliferation, metabolism, and angiogenesis, and has shown efficacy against AGC in preclinical and phase I/II studies. Methods: In a randomized, double-blind, multicenter, phase III study, patients age ≥18 years with confirmed AGC and disease progression after 1 or 2 lines of systemic chemotherapy were randomized 2:1 to oral EVE 10 mg/d plus best supportive care (BSC) or placebo (PBO) plus BSC. Randomization was stratified by region (Asia vs rest of world) and previous lines of chemotherapy (1 vs 2). Study drug was discontinued upon progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR), and safety. The final analysis was performed when 526 deaths occurred. Results: A total of 656 patients from 23 countries were enrolled from Jul 2009 to Dec 2010; 439 were randomized to EVE, 217 to PBO. Baseline characteristics were well balanced between arms; 73.6% were men, 55.3% were enrolled in Asia, 47.7% received 1 previous line of chemotherapy, and 50.6% had a gastrectomy. Median OS was 5.39 months with EVE vs 4.34 months with PBO (HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.75-1.08; P=0.1244). Median PFS per local investigator assessment was 1.68 months with EVE vs 1.41 months with PBO (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.56-0.78; p<0.0001). Six-month PFS estimates were 12.0% with EVE and 4.3% with PBO. OS and PFS results were consistent across the various subgroups. ORR (95% CI) was 4.5% (2.6%-7.1%) with EVE vs 2.1% (0.6%-5.3%) with PBO. The most common grade 3/4 adverse events were anemia (16.0% with EVE vs 12.6% with PBO), decreased appetite (11.0% vs 5.6%), and fatigue (7.8% vs 5.1%). Conclusions: EVE monotherapy did not significantly improve OS in patients with AGC previously treated with 1 or 2 lines of systemic chemotherapy. EVE did improve PFS. Results for OS and PFS were consistent across the various subgroups. The safety profile was consistent with that previously observed with EVE.

Combined analysis of three randomized phase III trials comparing S-1 monotherapy and S-1 combination therapy for first-line treatment of advanced gastric cancer.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 49-49
Author(s):  
Madoka Takeuchi ◽  
Wataru Ichikawa ◽  
Kohei Shitara ◽  
Yu Sunakawa ◽  
Koji Oba ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Combination Therapy ◽  
Advanced Gastric Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Phase Iii Trials

49 Background: S-1 is the gold standard for first line therapy of advanced gastric cancer in Asia. There have been multiple meta-analyses published researching and comparing the efficacy and safety of S-1 monotherapy versus combination1,2. However there has been no analysis using actual trial data. Methods: Actual data from three randomized Phase III trials were combined to compare the efficacy of S-1 Monotherapy and S-1 combination therapy. The START trial, comparing S-1 and combination S-1 with docetaxel, SPIRITS, comparing S-1 and combination S-1 with cisplatin and TOP-002, comparing S-1 and S-1 combination with irinotecan, were merged and combined. For this analysis, the three S-1 arms were combined (n = 642) and the different S-1 combination therapy were combined (n = 617) creating two new treatment arms. The primary efficacy outcome of overall survival, progression free survival and subset analysis of overall survival stratified by baseline characteristics were performed. Results: A total of 1248 patients, including 210 Korean patients from the START were used in the analysis. The median overall survival days for S-1 combination and monotherapy was 382 [209, 648] and 321 [177, 597] and median progression free survival days for S-1 combination and monotherapy was 153 [81, 267] and 122 [61, 204]. Both overall survival (p = 0.0088 HR = 0.85 (0.76,0.96)) and progression free survival ( p = < 0.001 HR = 0.75 (0.67,0.85)) was significantly longer in the combination therapy arm compared to the monotherapy arm. Conclusions:Although there are limitations, the analysis re-confirms that S-1 combination therapy shows to be more efficacious compared to S-1 monotherapy for advanced gastric cancer patients. It must be noted that heterogeneity of the S-1 arm was not carefully considered when combining the S-1 data for the trials. In addition, the results are limited to the Asian (Japanese and Korean) population.

Phase II study of S-1 monotherapy in taxane, cisplatin refractory gastric cancer

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4551-4551
Author(s):  
S. Cho ◽  
S. Lee ◽  
J. Hwang ◽  
W. Bae ◽  
H. Shim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Advanced Gastric Cancer ◽  
Clinical Benefit ◽  
Phase Ii Study ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Salvage Chemotherapy ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Previously Treated ◽  
Grade 3

4551 Background: S-1 is a fourth-generation oral fluoropyrimidine that was developed to mimic protracted continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU). In previous study, S-1 demonstrated promising activity which is comparable to combination chemotherapy in advanced gastric cancer. This phase II study evaluated the efficacy and safety of S-1 salvage chemotherapy, in patients with taxane and cisplatin refractory gastric cancer. The primary end point was progression free survival and secondary end points were overall survival, safety and clinical benefit. Methods: Patients were eligible if they had histologically documented gastric adenocarcinoma previously treated with taxane (docetaxel or paclitaxel) and cisplatin; age≥18; Eastern Clinical Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 2 or less; adequate organ function; no evidence of gastrointestinal obstruction or passage disturbance. S-1 treatment was performed according to BSA as followed; < BSA 1.25, 80 mg/day, 1.25 ≤ BSA < 1.5, 100 mg/day; BSA ≥ 1.5, 120 mg/day. Every dosage was delivered divided two times and administered for 4 weeks followed by 2 weeks of resting period. Treatment continued until progression of disease or life-threatening adverse events were occurred. Results: Fifty-four patients were enrolled in this study and of the patients, forty-eight patients were evaluable. A total 194 chemotherapy cycles were administered and median number of cycles was three. Four (8.3%) patients had a partial response and 18 (37.5%) patients had stable disease. The median progression free survival and overall survival were 3.8 and 10.2 months, respectively. Grade III/IV hematologic toxicities included neutropenia in 6 patients (12.5%) and there was no febrile neutropenia. Most of nonhematologic toxicities were diarrhea, asthenia, and mucositis, and there was no grade 3 or grade 4 except two patients, who developed grade 3 anorexia and diarrhea, respectively. The clinical benefit response was observed in 16 patients (33.3%). Conclusions: This results showed that S-1 monotherapy was active and safe salvage chemotherapy in patients with advanced gastric cancer previously treated with taxane and cisplatin. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Phase III Trial Comparing Intraperitoneal and Intravenous Paclitaxel Plus S-1 Versus Cisplatin Plus S-1 in Patients With Gastric Cancer With Peritoneal Metastasis: PHOENIX-GC Trial

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (19) ◽  
pp. 1922-1929 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hironori Ishigami ◽  
Yoshiyuki Fujiwara ◽  
Ryoji Fukushima ◽  
Atsushi Nashimoto ◽  
Hiroshi Yabusaki ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Survival Rate ◽  
Peritoneal Metastasis ◽  
Systemic Chemotherapy ◽  
Hazard Ratio ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Clinical Effects ◽  
Overall Survival Rate ◽  
Phase Iii Trial

Purpose Intraperitoneal paclitaxel plus systemic chemotherapy demonstrated promising clinical effects in patients with gastric cancer with peritoneal metastasis. We aimed to verify its superiority over standard systemic chemotherapy in overall survival. Patients and Methods This randomized phase III trial enrolled patients with gastric cancer with peritoneal metastasis who had received no or short-term (< 2 months) chemotherapy. Patients were randomly assigned at a two-to-one ratio to receive intraperitoneal and intravenous paclitaxel plus S-1 (IP; intraperitoneal paclitaxel 20 mg/m2 and intravenous paclitaxel 50 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 plus S-1 80 mg/m2 per day on days 1 to 14 for a 3-week cycle) or S-1 plus cisplatin (SP; S-1 80 mg/m2 per day on days 1 to 21 plus cisplatin 60 mg/m2 on day 8 for a 5-week cycle), stratified by center, previous chemotherapy, and extent of peritoneal metastasis. The primary end point was overall survival. Secondary end points were response rate, 3-year overall survival rate, and safety. Results We enrolled 183 patients and performed efficacy analyses in 164 eligible patients. Baseline characteristics were balanced between the arms, except that patients in the IP arm had significantly more ascites. The median survival times for the IP and SP arms were 17.7 and 15.2 months, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.49 to 1.04; stratified log-rank P = .080). In the sensitivity analysis adjusted for baseline ascites, the hazard ratio was 0.59 (95% CI, 0.39 to 0.87; P = .008). The 3-year overall survival rate was 21.9% (95% CI, 14.9% to 29.9%) in the IP arm and 6.0% (95% CI, 1.6% to 14.9%) in the SP arm. Both regimens were well tolerated. Conclusion This trial failed to show statistical superiority of intraperitoneal paclitaxel plus systemic chemotherapy. However, the exploratory analyses suggested possible clinical benefits of intraperitoneal paclitaxel for gastric cancer.

Pembrolizumab As Second-Line Therapy in Patients With Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma in KEYNOTE-240: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase III Trial

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (3) ◽  
pp. 193-202 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard S. Finn ◽  
Baek-Yeol Ryoo ◽  
Philippe Merle ◽  
Masatoshi Kudo ◽  
Mohamed Bouattour ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Interim Analysis ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Study Drug ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Previously Treated

PURPOSE Pembrolizumab demonstrated antitumor activity and safety in the phase II KEYNOTE-224 trial in previously treated patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). KEYNOTE-240 evaluated the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab in this population. PATIENTS AND METHODS This randomized, double-blind, phase III study was conducted at 119 medical centers in 27 countries. Eligible patients with advanced HCC, previously treated with sorafenib, were randomly assigned at a two-to-one ratio to receive pembrolizumab plus best supportive care (BSC) or placebo plus BSC. Primary end points were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS; one-sided significance thresholds, P = .0174 [final analysis] and P = .002 [first interim analysis], respectively). Safety was assessed in all patients who received ≥ 1 dose of study drug. RESULTS Between May 31, 2016, and November 23, 2017, 413 patients were randomly assigned. As of January 2, 2019, median follow-up was 13.8 months for pembrolizumab and 10.6 months for placebo. Median OS was 13.9 months (95% CI, 11.6 to 16.0 months) for pembrolizumab versus 10.6 months (95% CI, 8.3 to 13.5 months) for placebo (hazard ratio [HR], 0.781; 95% CI, 0.611 to 0.998; P = .0238). Median PFS for pembrolizumab was 3.0 months (95% CI, 2.8 to 4.1 months) versus 2.8 months (95% CI, 2.5 to 4.1 months) for placebo at the first interim analysis (HR, 0.775; 95% CI, 0.609 to 0.987; P = .0186) and 3.0 months (95% CI, 2.8 to 4.1 months) versus 2.8 months (95% CI, 1.6 to 3.0 months) at final analysis (HR, 0.718; 95% CI, 0.570 to 0.904; P = .0022). Grade 3 or higher adverse events occurred in 147 (52.7%) and 62 patients (46.3%) for pembrolizumab versus placebo; those that were treatment related occurred in 52 (18.6%) and 10 patients (7.5%), respectively. No hepatitis C or B flares were identified. CONCLUSION In this study, OS and PFS did not reach statistical significance per specified criteria. The results are consistent with those of KEYNOTE-224, supporting a favorable risk-to-benefit ratio for pembrolizumab in this population.

Addition of Aflibercept to Fluorouracil, Leucovorin, and Irinotecan Improves Survival in a Phase III Randomized Trial in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Previously Treated With an Oxaliplatin-Based Regimen

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (28) ◽  
pp. 3499-3506 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Van Cutsem ◽  
Josep Tabernero ◽  
Radek Lakomy ◽  
Hans Prenen ◽  
Jana Prausová ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Growth Factor ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Growth Factor Receptor ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
The United States ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Survival Times ◽  
Previously Treated

Purpose Treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) commonly involves a fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy regimen such as infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) or fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin, often combined with bevacizumab or an epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibody. We studied the effect of adding the novel antiangiogenic agent aflibercept (also known as ziv-aflibercept in the United States) to FOLFIRI in patients with mCRC previously treated with oxaliplatin, including patients who received prior bevacizumab. Patients and Methods Patients were randomly assigned to receive aflibercept (4 mg/kg intravenously; 612 patients) or placebo (614 patients) every 2 weeks in combination with FOLFIRI. Treatment was administered until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end point was overall survival. Results Adding aflibercept to FOLFIRI significantly improved overall survival relative to placebo plus FOLFIRI (hazard ratio [HR], 0.817; 95.34% CI, 0.713 to 0.937; P = .0032) with median survival times of 13.50 versus 12.06 months, respectively. Aflibercept also significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS; HR, 0.758; 95% CI, 0.661 to 0.869; P < .0001), with median PFS times of 6.90 versus 4.67 months, respectively. The effects on overall survival and PFS exhibited a consistent trend across prespecified subgroup analyses, including bevacizumab pretreated patients. Response rate was 19.8% (95% CI, 16.4% to 23.2%) with aflibercept plus FOLFIRI compared with 11.1% (95% CI, 8.5% to 13.8%) with placebo plus FOLFIRI (P = .0001). Adverse effects reported with aflibercept combined with FOLFIRI included the characteristic anti–vascular endothelial growth factor effects and also reflected an increased incidence of some chemotherapy-related toxicities. Conclusion Aflibercept in combination with FOLFIRI conferred a statistically significant survival benefit over FOLFIRI combined with placebo in patients with mCRC previously treated with oxaliplatin.

scholarly journals Hyperprogressive disease during nivolumab or irinotecan treatment in patients with advanced gastric cancer

ESMO Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. e000488 ◽  
Author(s):  
Masahiko Aoki ◽  
Hirokazu Shoji ◽  
Kengo Nagashima ◽  
Hiroshi Imazeki ◽  
Takahiro Miyamoto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Advanced Gastric Cancer ◽  
Survival Benefit ◽  
Poor Prognosis ◽  
Tumour Growth ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Prior Therapy ◽  
Hyperprogressive Disease

BackgroundNivolumab showed a survival benefit for advanced gastric cancer (AGC). However, an acceleration of tumour growth during immunotherapy, (hyperprogressive disease, HPD) has been reported in various cancers. This study reviewed the HPD in patients with AGC treated with nivolumab or irinotecan.MethodsThe subjects of this retrospective study were patients with AGC with measurable lesions, and their tumour growth rates (TGR) during nivolumab or irinotecan were compared with those during prior therapy. HPD was defined as an increase in TGR more than twofold.Results34 and 66 patients received nivolumab and irinotecan in third or later line between June 2009 and September 2018 at our hospital; 22 patients receiving nivolumab had prior treatment with irinotecan, and one patient received irinotecan after nivolumab. Nivolumab and irinotecan showed no differences in disease control rates (38.2% and 34.8%) and in progression-free survival (PFS) (HR 1.1, 95% CI 0.7 to 1.6, p=0.802). The incidence of HPD was slightly higher after nivolumab (29.4%) than after irinotecan (13.5%) (p=0.0656), showing no differences in background between the patients with and without HPD. Compared between HPD and PD other than HPD after nivolumab, the HRs for PFS and overall survival (OS) were 1.1 (95% CI 0.5 to 2.7; p=0.756), and 2.1 (95% CI 0.7 to 5.8; p=0.168), but such clear difference in OS was not observed after irinotecan.ConclusionsHPD was observed more frequently after nivolumab compared with irinotecan, which was associated with a poor prognosis after nivolumab but not so clearly after irinotecan.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document