Phase II double-blind, randomized study of selumetinib (SEL) plus dacarbazine (DTIC) versus placebo (PBO) plus DTIC as first-line treatment for advanced BRAF-mutant cutaneous or unknown primary melanoma.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9004-9004 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark R. Middleton ◽  
Reinhard Dummer ◽  
Ralf Gutzmer ◽  
Paul Lorigan ◽  
Kevin Kim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Braf Mutation ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Randomized Study ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Primary Melanoma ◽  
Unknown Primary ◽  
Clinical Activity ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Treatment

9004 Background: BRAF mutations play an oncogenic role in melanomas. Selumetinib (AZD6244, ARRY-142886) inhibits MEK1/2 downstream of B-Raf and may have an additive effect to chemotherapy. We prospectively evaluated SEL + DTIC vs PBO + DTIC in patients with stage III-IV BRAF mutation-positive advanced cutaneous or unknown primary melanoma (NCT00936221). Methods: Eligible patients (pts) received iv DTIC 1000 mg/m2, and po SEL 75 mg or matched PBO bd as first-line treatment. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS); secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and safety and tolerability. Results: A total of 385 pts were screened across 44 centers; 91 patients were randomized (SEL + DTIC, 45; PBO + DTIC, 46). One pt from each group did not receive the randomized treatment. Baseline characteristics were balanced between the two groups, with the exception of histology, gender and previous medications. At data cut-off, 66 deaths had occurred (73% maturity) and median follow-up was 12.3 mo. OS was longer for SEL + DTIC vs PBO + DTIC (median 13.9 vs 10.5 mo), but this did not meet statistical significance (HR 0.93; 80% CI 0.67, 1.28; 1-sided p=0.3873). PFS was significantly improved for SEL + DTIC vs PBO + DTIC, median 5.6 vs 3.0 mo (HR 0.63; 80% CI 0.47, 0.84; 1-sided p=0.021). ORR was 40% with SEL + DTIC vs 26% with PBO + DTIC. Most frequent adverse events (AEs) observed with SEL + DTIC were: nausea (64%), dermatitis acneiform (52%), diarrhea (48%), vomiting (48%), and peripheral edema (43%). AEs that led to hospitalization were higher for SEL + DTIC vs PBO + DTIC (36 vs 13%), and were mostly infections and gastrointestinal disorders. The incidence of grade ≥3 AEs (68 vs 42%), serious AEs (50 vs 18%) and discontinuation of the randomized treatment due to AEs were higher for SEL + DTIC vs PBO + DTIC (16 vs 4%). Conclusions: Clinical activity was observed in patients with BRAF mutation-positive melanoma treated with SEL + DTIC, reflected by a nonsignificant improvement in OS and a significant benefit in PFS. Tolerability of this combination was generally consistent with the monotherapy safety profiles. Clinical trial information: NCT00936221.

Phase 3 (COSMIC-312) study of cabozantinib (C) in combination with atezolizumab (A) versus sorafenib (S) in patients (pts) with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC) who have not received previous systemic anticancer therapy.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS4157-TPS4157 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robin Kate Kelley ◽  
Ann-Lii Cheng ◽  
Fadi S. Braiteh ◽  
Joong-Won Park ◽  
Fawzi Benzaghou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Clinical Activity ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
Disease Etiology ◽  
Multiple Tumor ◽  
First Line Treatment

TPS4157 Background: C inhibits tyrosine kinases involved in tumor growth, angiogenesis, and immune regulation, including MET, VEGFR, and TAM kinases (Tyro3, AXL, MER). C is approved for treatment of aHCC after prior S based on improved overall survival (OS) vs placebo in the phase 3 CELESTIAL trial (Abou-Alfa NEJM 2018). Standard of care for first-line treatment of aHCC is tyrosine kinase inhibition with S or lenvatinib, and phase 3 trials of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in first- and second- line aHCC are ongoing. C may promote an immune-permissive tumor environment, which could enhance response to ICIs. C is being evaluated in combination with the anti-PD-L1 antibody A in multiple tumor types including HCC in a phase 1 study; and dose, preliminary clinical activity, and safety have been established in aRCC (Agarwal Ann Oncol 2018). A in combination with bevacizumab, an anti-VEGF antibody, has shown preliminary clinical activity in first-line aHCC (Pishvaian Ann Oncol 2018). Here, we present the study design of a phase 3 trial of C+A vs S in pts with aHCC who have not received prior systemic therapy. Methods: This international, randomized, open-label phase 3 trial (NCT03755791) is evaluating the efficacy and safety of C+A vs S as first-line treatment for aHCC. Eligibility criteria include age ≥18 years, BCLC stage B or C, Child-Pugh A, ECOG PS 0 or 1, and measurable disease per RECIST 1.1. Patients are randomized 6:3:1 to an experimental arm of C (40 mg qd) + A (1200 mg infusion q3w), a control arm of S (400 mg bid), and an exploratory arm of C monotherapy (60 mg qd). 640 pts are planned at ~200 sites globally. Randomization is stratified by disease etiology (HBV [with or without HCV], HCV [without HBV], or other), region (Asia, other), and the presence of extrahepatic disease and/or macrovascular invasion (yes, no). OS and progression-free survival are coprimary endpoints and objective response rate is a secondary endpoint. Additional endpoints include safety, pharmacokinetics, and correlation of biomarker analyses with clinical outcomes. Enrollment in COSMIC-312 is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT03755791.

scholarly journals A change in the timing for starting systemic therapies for hepatocellular carcinoma : the comparison of sorafenib and lenvatinib as the first-line treatment

2021 ◽  
Vol 84 (1) ◽  
pp. 65-72
Author(s):  
T Hatanaka ◽  
S Kakizaki ◽  
T Nagashima ◽  
T Ueno ◽  
M Namikawa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Intermediate Stage ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Sorafenib Group ◽  
Study Results ◽  
First Line Treatment ◽  
Systemic Therapies

Aim : The aim of this retrospective multicenter study was to evaluate the differences in the timing for starting systemic therapies as the first-line treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Methods : A total of 375 patients with HCC treated with sorafenib from May 2009 to March 2018 and 56 patients treated with lenvatinib from March 2018 to November 2018 at our affiliated hospitals were included in this study. Results : The median ages of the sorafenib and lenvatinib groups were 71.0 (interquartile range [IQR] : 64.0-77.0) and 73.5 (IQR : 68.0 -80.0) years old, and 300 (80.0%) and 42 (75.0%) patients were men, respectively. The Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage was early, intermediate and advanced in 39 patients (10.4%), 133 patients (35.5%) and 203 patients (54.1%) in the sorafenib group and 1 patient (1.8%), 17 patients (30.4%) and 38 patients (67.9%)in the lenvatinib group, respectively. In the analysis of intermediate HCC, patients who satisfied the criteria of TACE failure/refractoriness(P=0.017), those with ALBI grade 1 (P=0.040), and those with a serum AFP level <200 ng/ml (P=0.027)were found more frequently in the lenvatinib group than in the sorafenib group, with statistical significance. The objective response rate (ORR) of lenvatinib was 34.8% in the overall patients and 46.7%in the intermediate-stage HCC patients, which was significantly higher than sorafenib (P=0.001, P=0.017). Conclusions : The emergence of lenvatinib has encouraged physicians to start systemic chemotherapy earlier in intermediate-stage HCC patients.

The significance of EGFR pathway mutations for the efficacy of first line treatment with bevacizumab in metastatic colonrectal cancer.

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 699-699
Author(s):  
Izuma Nakayama ◽  
Eiji Shinozaki ◽  
Takeru Wakatsuki ◽  
Yosuke Kumekawa ◽  
Mariko Ogura ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Braf Mutation ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Pik3ca Mutation ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
First Line ◽  
Mutational Status ◽  
Exon 9 ◽  
Exon 20 ◽  
First Line Treatment

699 Background: After analysis of minor RAS mutations (KRAS exon3, 4/NRAS) in FIRE-3 or PRIME study, so called all RAS mutation would be being regarded as a biomarker for anti-EGFR antibodies. BRAF and PIK3CA mutation would be a candidate of biomarkers for anti EGFR targeted therapies. However it remains unknown whether EGFR pathway mutations affect the efficacy of bevacizumab in Stage.‡W CRC. Methods: Of the 1,001 consecutive patients of CRC in our institute between Nov 2006 and Dec 2013, we examined RAS, PIK3CA and BRAF mutational status, 141 patients received systemic chemotherapy for the first line treatment of Stage.‡W. Among them, 96 patients were administered chemotherapy with bevacizumab. Overall survival (OS), Time to Treatment Failure (TTF) and Objective Response Rate (ORR) were evaluated by mutational status. Results: Baseline characteristics were as follows (n=141): median age, 63; male/female, 80/61; ECOG PS 0-1/2, 135/4; chemotherapy with bevacizumab/chemotherapy with anti-EGFR antibodies/cytotoxic agent alone, 96/22/23;KRAS (codon 12,13) wild-type (WT)/RAS wild-type(WT), 89/80; PIK3CA mutation (exon 9/exon 20)/BRAF mutation, 11(5/6)/13. Median OS and TTF were 32.1 and 8.0 months respectively. In chemotherapy with bevacizumab, ORRs were 46.3% (all cases), 55.3% (KRAS WT), 54.5% (RAS WT) and 60.6% (all WT) respectively. ORR was gradually improved by focusing therapeutic target on all wild population. However, there were no significant differences in TTF and OS among them. PIK3CA mutation had a trend toward shorter TTF of bevacizumab (p=0.056). This trend was observed in PIK3CA mutation on exon 20 but not observed exon 9. BRAF mutation had significantly associated with poor OS not only for bevacizumab cases but also all therapies. Conclusions: In our study, profiling of EGFR pathway mutations may not contribute to enrich patients with benefit from chemotherapy with bevacizumab.

scholarly journals Clinical Activity and Safety of Penpulimab (Anti-PD-1) With Anlotinib as First-Line Therapy for Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma: An Open-Label, Multicenter, Phase Ib/II Trial (AK105-203)

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chun Han ◽  
Sisi Ye ◽  
Chunhong Hu ◽  
Liangfang Shen ◽  
Qun Qin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Objective Response ◽  
Chinese Patients ◽  
Locoregional Therapy ◽  
Clinical Activity ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Phase Ib ◽  
Multicenter Phase ◽  
First Line Treatment

ObjectiveThis study aims to assess the efficacy and safety of penpulimab (a humanized anti-PD-1 IgG1 antibody) with anlotinib in the first-line treatment of Chinese patients with uHCC.MethodsIn this open-label multicenter phase Ib/II trial, patients with histologically or cytologically confirmed uHCC, without previous systemic treatment, aged 18–75 years old, classified as BCLC stage B (not amenable for locoregional therapy) or C, with Child–Pugh score ≤7 and ECOG performance status ≤1 were enrolled. Patients received penpulimab [200 mg intravenous (i.v.) Q3W] and oral anlotinib (8 mg/day, 2 weeks on/1 week off). The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included safety, disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), time to progression (TTP), duration of response (DoR), and overall survival (OS). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04172571).ResultsAt the data cutoff (December 30, 2020), 31 eligible patients had been enrolled and treated with a median follow-up of 14.7 months (range, 1.4–22.1). The ORR was 31.0% (95% CI, 15.3–50.8%), and the DCR was 82.8% (95% CI, 64.2–94.2%). The median PFS and TTP for 31 patients were 8.8 months (95% CI, 4.0–12.3) and 8.8 months (95% CI, 4.0–12.9) respectively. The median OS was not reached; the 12-month OS rate was 69.0% (95% CI, 48.9–82.5%). Only 19.4% (6/31) of patients had grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs).ConclusionPenpulimab plus anlotinib showed promising anti-tumor activity and a favorable safety profile as first-line treatment of patients with uHCC.

Unknown primary Merkel cell carcinoma responding well to first‐line treatment with avelumab

2019 ◽  
Vol 46 (8) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shiho Hanai ◽  
Takatoshi Shimauchi ◽  
Reiko Kageyama ◽  
Masahiro Aoshima ◽  
Taisuke Ito ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Merkel Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Unknown Primary ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Merkel Cell ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Treatment

Anlotinib combined with pemetrexed and carboplatin as first-line treatment in advanced nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): ALTER L012.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e21040-e21040
Author(s):  
Qiming Wang ◽  
Xiuli Yang ◽  
Tianjiang Ma ◽  
Qiumin Yang ◽  
Chenghui Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Kinase Inhibitor ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Treatment Naïve ◽  
Nsclc Patients ◽  
First Line Treatment

e21040 Background: The anti-angiogenic drug bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy has achieved positive results in previous studies. In particular, the median progression-free survival (PFS) for EGFR-negative patients was increased to 8.3 months in the BEYOND study. Unlike bevacizumab, anlotinib is a novel multitarget tyrosine kinase inhibitor and can be conveniently orally administered. In the phase III trial ALTER 0303, anlotinib significantly improved overall survival (OS) and PFS in advanced NSCLC patients. This exploratory study aims to establish the efficacy and safety of anlotinib in combination with pemetrexed and carboplatin as first-line treatment in advanced non-squamous NSCLC. Methods: This is a multi-center, single-arm clinical trial. Adults with treatment-naive, histologically confirmed stage IIIB-IV non-squamous NSCLC, ECOG 0-1, and without known sensitizing EGFR/ALK alterations are included. Patients received anlotinib (12 mg p.o., QD, d1 to 14, 21 days per cycle) combined with pemetrexed (500 mg/m2, iv, d15-21, Q3W) + carboplatin (AUC = 5, iv, d15-21, Q3W) for 4 cycles followed by anlotinib and pemetrexed maintenance until disease progression (PD). The primary endpoint was PFS. Secondary endpoints were OS, objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR) and safety. Results: Between Mar 2019 and Dec 2020, 40 patients were enrolled in six centers and 31 of them have received at least one tumor assessment. Median age was 62 (33, 75); 66.7% male, 11.1% brain metastasis. At data cutoff (Dec 31, 2020), patients were followed up for a median of 8.26 months. Median PFS was 10.5 months (95% CI: NE, NE); ORR was 67.7% (0 CR, 21 PR), DCR was 96.8% (0 CR, 21 PR, 9 SD) and median OS was NE. The most common Grade ≥ 3 AEs were hypertension 22.2%, neutropenia 19.44%, myelosuppression 11.1%, thrombocytopenia 8.33%, leukopenia 5.56%, hand-foot syndrome 5.56% and there were no Grade 5 toxicities. Conclusions: This study finds that anlotinib plus pemetrexed and carboplatin can significantly improve PFS and ORR compared to standard chemotherapy for treatment-naive non-squamous NSCLC patients. The combination was well tolerated, and the AEs were manageable. The follow-up time is not sufficient, and the OS outcomes need further evaluation. Clinical trial information: NCT03790228.

Phase III Multicenter Randomized Trial of Oxaliplatin Added to Chronomodulated Fluorouracil–Leucovorin as First-Line Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

2000 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 136-136 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Giacchetti ◽  
B. Perpoint ◽  
R. Zidani ◽  
N. Le Bail ◽  
R. Faggiuolo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Sensory Neuropathy ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Survival Times ◽  
First Line ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
First Line Treatment

PURPOSE: To study how adding oxaliplatin (l-OHP) to chronomodulated fluorouracil (5-FU)–leucovorin (LV) affected the objective response rate, as first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two hundred patients from 15 institutions in four countries were randomly assigned to receive a 5-day course of chronomodulated 5-FU and LV (700 and 300 mg/m2/d, respectively; peak delivery rate at 0400 hours) with or without l-OHP on the first day of each course (125 mg/m2, as a 6-hour infusion). Each course was repeated every 21 days. Response was assessed by extramural review of computed tomography scans. RESULTS: Grade 3 to 4 toxicity from 5-FU–LV occurred in ≤ 5% of the patients (≤ 1% of the courses). Grade 3 to 4 diarrhea occurred in 43% of the patients given l-OHP (10% of the courses), and less than 2% of the patients had severe hematotoxicity. Thirteen percent of the patients had moderate functional impairment from peripheral sensory neuropathy. Sixteen percent of the patients receiving 5-FU–LV had an objective response (95% confidence interval [CI], 9% to 24%), compared with 53% of those receiving additional l-OHP (95% CI, 42% to 63%) (P < .001). The median progression-free survival time was 6.1 months with 5-FU–LV (range, 4.1 to 7.4 months) and 8.7 months (7.4 to 9.2 months) with l-OHP and 5-FU–LV (P = .048). Median survival times were 19.9 and 19.4 months, respectively. CONCLUSION: By chronomodulating 5-FU–LV, we were able to add l-OHP without compromising dose-intensities. l-OHP significantly improved the antitumor efficacy of this regimen.

Masitinib plus gemcitabine as first-line treatment of pancreatic cancer with pain: Results from phase 3 study AB12005.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4018-4018
Author(s):  
Joel Ezenfis ◽  
Olivier Hermine ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Disease Stage ◽  
Study Cohort ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
First Line Treatment

4018 Background: Masitinib (MAS) is a small molecule drug targeting mast cell and macrophage activity, innate immune cells that are critical components of the tumor microenvironment. Proof of concept that MAS in combination with gemcitabine (GEM) improved overall survival (OS) in pancreatic cancer (PC) patients (pts) with pain, was previously shown [doi 10.1093/annonc/mdv133]. The presence of pain in PC is thought to identify pts whose disease is driven in part by a pro-tumoral immune response. Methods: AB12005 was a prospective, placebo (PBO) controlled, double blind, randomized (2:1 MAS:PBO, stratified by disease stage, ECOG and geographic region) phase 3 trial, evaluating oral MAS (6.0 mg/kg/d) in combination with GEM (1000 mg/m²) against PBO plus GEM for the treatment of unresectable locally advanced PC (LAPC) and/or metastatic PC (mPC) pts with pain criteria; i.e. baseline visual analog scale of pain intensity (VAS) > 20 and/or pt treated with an opioid analgesics dose ≥1 mg/kg/d at baseline. Eligible pts were chemo-naïve with histologically or cytologically confirmed inoperable LAPC or mPC and an ECOG status ≤2. The estimated sample size was ̃330 pts to detect an OS hazard ratio (HR) of 0.68 (80% power, 2-sided α = 0.025) after 310 deaths. The study was successful if improvement in median OS (primary endpoint) relative to control reached a 2.5% level of statistical significance for either a targeted subgroup of LAPC with pain criteria, or the overall study cohort. Results: A total of 384 pts were enrolled (safety population n = 383; mITT n = 379; target subgroup n = 92). In the predefined subgroup of unresectable LAPC with pain, MAS-GEM (n = 62) showed significant benefit over PBO-GEM (n = 30) with median OS of 13.0 months (97.5% CI [11.0;18.0]) vs 11.2 months (97.5% CI [7.4;13.0]); p = 0.007. The HR was 0.46 (97.5% CI [0.2;0.9], p = 0.0047), corresponding to a significant 54% reduction in risk of death for MAS-GEM pts relative to control. Secondary analyses in the same subgroup were convergent with this primary outcome. Median PFS showed a 1.8 month between group difference in favor of MAS-GEM (p = 0.039), with a HR of 0.47 (97.5% CI [0.3;0.9], p = 0.014). The 12-month and 18-month OS rates showed a 1.3 fold and 3.4 fold improvement, respectively, in favor of MAS-GEM (53.2% and 33.9% for MAS-GEM vs 40.0% and 10% for PBO-GEM, respectively). In the overall population, comprising LAPC and mPC pts with pain, no survival benefit was observed; median OS for MAS-GEM (n = 244) was 6.9 months vs 8.0 months for PBO-GEM (n = 135); p = 0.461. The MAS-GEM combination was well tolerated with no sign of add-on toxicity. The proportion of patients presenting at least one adverse event (AE) or serious AE was respectively, 96.3% and 19.1% for MAS-GEM (n = 246) vs 99.3% and 21.3% for PBO-GEM (n = 136). Conclusions: The combination MAS (6.0 mg/kg/d) plus GEM may provide a new first line treatment option for unresectable LAPC pts with associated pain. Clinical trial information: NCT03766295.

scholarly journals Checkpoint inhibitors plus chemotherapy for first-line treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (9) ◽  
pp. FSO421 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aung Myint Tun ◽  
Kyaw Zin Thein ◽  
Wai Lin Thein ◽  
Elizabeth Guevara
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
High Grade ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Treatment

Background: We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of upfront add-on immunotherapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC). Methods: We performed a literature search on first-line chemotherapy ± immunotherapy in NSCLC. We utilized Revman version 5.3 to calculate the estimated pooled hazard ratio for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) and pooled risk ratio for objective response rate (ORR), all-grade and high-grade adverse events with 95% CI. Results: We analyzed 4322 patients. The pooled hazard ratios for OS, PFS and ORR were 0.74 (95% CI: 0.62–0.88; p = 0.0007), 0.62 (95% CI: 0.57–0.68; p = 0.00001) and 1.51 (95% CI: 1.3–1.74; p = 0.00001), respectively. The pooled risk ratios for all-grade and high-grade adverse events were 1.01 (95% CI: 0.99–1.03; p = 0.27) and 1.17 (95% CI: 1.07–1.28; p = 0.0006), respectively. Conclusion: Add-on immunotherapy significantly improves PFS, OS and ORR for the first-line treatment of advanced NSCLC with a reasonable safety profile.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document