scholarly journals Efficacy and Safety of Trabectedin or Dacarbazine for Metastatic Liposarcoma or Leiomyosarcoma After Failure of Conventional Chemotherapy: Results of a Phase III Randomized Multicenter Clinical Trial

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (8) ◽  
pp. 786-793 ◽  
Author(s):  
George D. Demetri ◽  
Margaret von Mehren ◽  
Robin L. Jones ◽  
Martee L. Hensley ◽  
Scott M. Schuetze ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Disease Control ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Hazard Ratio ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Prior Therapy ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
End Point ◽  
Patient Reported

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.

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 ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Performance Status ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Skin Toxicity ◽  
Least Square ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
First Line ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
Patient Reported

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]

Efficacy of avelumab plus axitinib (A + Ax) versus sunitinib (S) by number of IMDC risk factors and tumor sites at baseline in advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC): Extended follow-up results from JAVELIN Renal 101.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 302-302
Author(s):  
Yoshihiko Tomita ◽  
Robert J. Motzer ◽  
Toni K. Choueiri ◽  
Brian I. Rini ◽  
Hideaki Miyake ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Risk Groups ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
To Receive

302 Background: In the phase III JAVELIN Renal 101 trial (NCT02684006), A + Ax demonstrated progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR) benefit across IMDC risk groups (favorable, intermediate, and poor) vs S in patients with previously untreated aRCC. Here we report efficacy of A + Ax vs S by number of IMDC risk factors (0, 1, 2, 3, and 4-6) and target tumor sites (1, 2, 3, and ≥4) at baseline from the second interim analysis of overall survival (OS). Methods: Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive A 10 mg/kg intravenously every 2 wk + Ax 5 mg orally twice daily or S 50 mg orally once daily for 4 wk (6-wk cycle). PFS and ORR per independent central review (RECIST 1.1) and OS were assessed. Results: At data cut-off (Jan 2019), median (m) follow-up for OS and PFS was 19.3 vs 19.2 mo and 16.8 vs 15.2 mo for the A + Ax vs S arm, respectively. The table shows OS, PFS, and ORR by number of IMDC risk factors and target tumor sites at baseline. A + Ax generally demonstrated efficacy benefit vs S across subgroups. Conclusions: With extended follow-up, A + Ax generally demonstrated efficacy benefit vs S across the number of IMDC risk factors and tumor sites at baseline in aRCC. OS was still immature; follow-up for the final analysis is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT02684006 . [Table: see text]

ENGOT-EN6/NSGO-RUBY: A phase III, randomized, double-blind, multicenter study of dostarlimab + carboplatin-paclitaxel versus placebo + carboplatin-paclitaxel in recurrent or primary advanced endometrial cancer (EC).

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS6107-TPS6107
Author(s):  
Mansoor Raza Mirza ◽  
Robert L. Coleman ◽  
Lars Christian Hanker ◽  
Brian M. Slomovitz ◽  
Giorgio Valabrega ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Objective Response ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Disease Status ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Stage Iii ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Primary Stage ◽  
Patient Reported

TPS6107 Background: Carboplatin-paclitaxel is considered standard systemic anticancer therapy for recurrent or advanced EC for which surgery and/or radiation are not curative. Dostarlimab (TSR-042) is an anti-programmed cell death (PD)-1 humanized monoclonal antibody that has demonstrated antitumor activity and an acceptable safety profile in patients (pts) with recurrent or advanced EC in the GARNET trial. The RUBY trial was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of dostarlimab in combination with carboplatin-paclitaxel in recurrent or primary advanced EC compared with carboplatin-paclitaxel alone. Methods: This is a global, randomized, double-blind, multicenter, placebo-controlled study. Eligible pts must have first recurrent or primary stage III or stage IV EC with a low potential for cure by radiation therapy or surgery alone or in combination. Pts with carcinosarcoma are eligible for enrollment. 470 pts will be enrolled from approximately 160 sites in the ENGOT countries, United States, and Canada. Stratification factors are microsatellite instability (MSI) status (MSI-high [MSI-H] or microsatellite stable [MSS]), prior external pelvic radiotherapy (yes or no), and disease status (recurrent, primary stage III, or primary stage IV). Pts will be randomized 1:1 to receive combination dostarlimab 500 mg or placebo + carboplatin AUC 5 + paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 every 3 weeks for 6 cycles followed by dostarlimab 1000 mg or placebo monotherapy every 6 weeks for up to 3 years in the absence of progressive disease, death, unacceptable toxicity, or patient/physician decision to withdraw from the study. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival (PFS) as assessed by the investigator in the all-comers population and the MSI-H population per RECIST version 1.1. Secondary efficacy endpoints are PFS assessed by blinded independent central review per RECIST version 1.1, overall survival, objective response rate, duration of response, disease control rate, safety and tolerability, and patient-reported outcomes. Clinical trial information: NCT03981796.

Phase III Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing the Survival of Patients With Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treated With Nolatrexed or Doxorubicin

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (21) ◽  
pp. 3069-3075 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert G. Gish ◽  
Camillo Porta ◽  
Lucian Lazar ◽  
Paul Ruff ◽  
Ronald Feld ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Karnofsky Performance Status ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Study Objective

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.

Randomized, Multicenter, Open-Label Study of Oxaliplatin Plus Fluorouracil/Leucovorin Versus Doxorubicin As Palliative Chemotherapy in Patients With Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma From Asia

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (28) ◽  
pp. 3501-3508 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shukui Qin ◽  
Yuxian Bai ◽  
Ho Yeong Lim ◽  
Sumitra Thongprasert ◽  
Yee Chao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Palliative Chemotherapy ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Local Treatment ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Open Label ◽  
End Point

Purpose To determine whether FOLFOX4 (infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin) administered as palliative chemotherapy to patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) provides a survival benefit and efficacy versus doxorubicin. Patients and Methods This multicenter, open-label, randomized, phase III study in mainland China, Taiwan, Korea, and Thailand involved 371 patients age 18 to 75 years who had locally advanced or metastatic HCC and were ineligible for curative resection or local treatment. They were randomly assigned at a ratio of one to one to receive either FOLFOX4 (n = 184) or doxorubicin (n = 187). The primary end point was overall survival (OS); secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), response rate (RR) by RECIST (version 1.0), and safety. Results At the prespecified final analysis, median OS was 6.40 months with FOLFOX4 (95% CI, 5.30 to 7.03) and 4.97 months with doxorubicin (95% CI, 4.23 to 6.03; P = .07; hazard ratio [HR], 0.80; 95% CI, 0.63 to 1.02). Median PFS was 2.93 months with FOLFOX4 (95% CI, 2.43 to 3.53), and 1.77 months with doxorubicin (95% CI, 1.63 to 2.30; P < .001; HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.49 to 0.79). RR was 8.15% with FOLFOX4 and 2.67% with doxorubicin (P = .02). On continued follow-up, the trend toward increased OS with FOLFOX4 was maintained (P = .04; HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.63 to 0.99). Toxicity was consistent with previous experiences with FOLFOX4; proportions of grade 3 to 4 adverse events were similar between treatments. Conclusion Although the study did not meet its primary end point, the trend toward improved OS with FOLFOX4, along with increased PFS and RR, suggests that this regimen may confer some benefit to Asian patients, but an OS benefit cannot be concluded from these data.

ELOQUENT-1: A phase III, randomized, open-label trial of lenalidomide/dexamethasone with or without elotuzumab in subjects with previously untreated multiple myeloma (CA204-006).

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS8113-TPS8113 ◽  
Author(s):  
Meletios A. Dimopoulos ◽  
Thierry Facon ◽  
Paul Gerard Guy Richardson ◽  
Robert Z. Orlowski ◽  
Jesùs F. San-Miguel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Response Duration ◽  
Surface Glycoprotein ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Cell Transplant ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Cell Surface Glycoprotein ◽  
Prior Therapy

TPS8113 Background: Elotuzumab (Elo) is a humanized monoclonal IgG1 antibody targeting the cell surface glycoprotein CS1, which is highly expressed on >95% of MM cells. In a MM xenograft mouse model, the combination of Elo + lenalidomide (Len) significantly reduced tumor volume in a synergistic manner compared with either agent alone. In a phase 2 study (N=73) of Elo (10 or 20 mg/kg) in combination with Len and low-dose-dexamethasone (Dex) in pts with RR MM, the 10 mg/kg dose group (n=36) demonstrated objective response rates (ORR) of 92% in all pts, and 100% in pts who had received only 1 prior therapy (n=16). The higher response rate in pts with fewer prior lines of therapy provides a rationale for investigating this combination earlier in the disease course. This randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial will determine if the addition of Elo to Len/Dex improves progression-free survival (PFS) in pts with newly diagnosed, untreated MM. Methods: Pts (N=750) with newly diagnosed symptomatic MM ineligible for stem cell transplant will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive 28-day cycles of Len 25 mg PO (days1-21) and Dex 40 mg PO (days 1, 8, 15 and 22) with or without Elo. Elo dose and schedule is 10 mg/kg IV on days 1, 8, 15, 22 in the first 2 cycles and on days 1 and 15 of cycles 3-18 followed by 20 mg/kg on day 1 of cycle 19 onward. Dex 8 mg IV + 28 mg PO is used during the weeks with Elo. Treatment will continue until disease progression, death, or withdrawal of consent. Pts will be followed up for response every 4 weeks until progressive disease and for survival every 16 weeks. The primary endpoint is PFS (90% power for a hazard ratio [experimental to control arm] of 0.74) and the secondary endpoints are ORR and overall survival. Exploratory endpoints are safety, time to response, duration of response, time to subsequent therapy, health-related quality of life, and pharmacokinetics and immunogenicity of Elo. Potential biomarkers will also be assessed. As of January 1, 2012, 13 pts were enrolled and 9 pts were treated. NCT01335399.

Efficacy and safety of avelumab plus axitinib (A + Ax) versus sunitinib (S) in elderly patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC): Extended follow-up results from JAVELIN Renal 101.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 301-301
Author(s):  
Yoshihiko Tomita ◽  
Robert J. Motzer ◽  
Toni K. Choueiri ◽  
Brian I. Rini ◽  
Hideaki Miyake ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Elderly Patients ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Risk Groups ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Age Group ◽  
Grade 3

301 Background: In the phase III JAVELIN Renal 101 trial (NCT02684006), A + Ax demonstrated significantly longer progression-free survival (PFS) and a higher objective response rate (ORR) vs S in patients with previously untreated aRCC. The role of immune checkpoint + VEGFR inhibition in elderly patients remains unclear. Here we report the efficacy of A + Ax vs S by age group from the second interim analysis (IA) of overall survival (OS) and the safety of A + Ax by age group from the first IA. Methods: Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive A 10 mg/kg intravenously every 2 wk + Ax 5 mg orally twice daily or S 50 mg orally once daily for 4 wk (6-wk cycle). PFS and ORR per independent central review (RECIST 1.1), OS, and safety by age group (<65, ≥65 to <75, and ≥75 y) were assessed. Results: A total of 271/138/33 and 275/128/41 patients in each age group (<65, ≥65 to <75, and ≥75 y, respectively) were randomized to the A + Ax or S arm, respectively. The proportion of IMDC risk groups was generally well balanced between the A + Ax and S arm in each age group, although in the ≥75 y age group, the frequency of patients with intermediate risk was slightly higher in the A + Ax arm, and that of patients with favorable risk was slightly higher in the S arm. The percentages of patients with favorable/intermediate/poor risk in each age group were 19%/61%/19%, 28%/58%/13%, and 12%/76%/12% in the A + Ax arm vs 20%/63%/16%, 23%/60%/16%, and 24%/61%/15% in the S arm. At data cut-off (Jan 2019) for the second IA, median follow-up for OS and PFS was 19.3 vs 19.2 mo and 16.8 vs 15.2 mo for the A + Ax vs S arm, respectively. The table shows OS, PFS, and ORR by age group. In the A + Ax arm, the most common treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were diarrhea (62%/68%/42%), hypertension (49%/49%/55%), palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome (37%/31%/15%), fatigue (37%/53%/30%), and nausea (34%/37%/21%) in each age group. Grade ≥3 treatment-emergent AEs and immune-related AEs were observed in 69%/74%/73% and 39%/40%/24% of patients in each age group, respectively. Conclusions: A + Ax demonstrated favorable efficacy across age groups, including patients aged ≥75 y. OS was still immature; follow-up for the final analysis is ongoing. The safety profile was generally consistent between age groups. Clinical trial information: NCT02684006 . [Table: see text]

scholarly journals Randomized Phase III Study of FOLFOX Alone or With Pegilodecakin as Second-Line Therapy in Patients With Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer That Progressed After Gemcitabine (SEQUOIA)

2021 ◽  
pp. JCO.20.02232
Author(s):  
J. Randolph Hecht ◽  
Sara Lonardi ◽  
Johanna Bendell ◽  
Hao-Wen Sim ◽  
Teresa Macarulla ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Transforming Growth Factor ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Hazard Ratio ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Ductal Adenocarcinoma ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Response Evaluation ◽  
Phase Iii Study ◽  
Gemcitabine Refractory

PURPOSE SEQUOIA compared efficacy and safety of adding pegilodecakin (PEG), a pegylated recombinant human interleukin (IL)-10, with folinic acid, fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) in patients following progression on first-line gemcitabine-containing therapy with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). PATIENTS AND METHODS SEQUOIA, a randomized, global phase III study, compared FOLFOX with PEG + FOLFOX as second line in gemcitabine-refractory PDAC. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 (PEG + FOLFOX:FOLFOX) and stratified by prior gemcitabine and region. Eligible patients had only one prior gemcitabine-containing treatment. Primary end point was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), response evaluation per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumor (RECIST) 1.1, and safety. Exploratory analyses included biomarkers related to immune activation. RESULTS Between March 1, 2017, and September 9, 2019, 567 patients were randomly assigned PEG + FOLFOX (n = 283) or FOLFOX (n = 284). Most (94.7%) patients received prior gemcitabine plus nab paclitaxel. OS was similar comparing PEG + FOLFOX versus FOLFOX (median: 5.8 v 6.3 months; hazard ratio = 1.045; 95% CI, 0.863 to 1.265). Also, PFS (median 2.1 v 2.1 months; hazard ratio = 0.981; 95% CI, 0.808 to 1.190) and objective response rate (4.6% v 5.6%) were similar between the treatment arms. Most common (≥ 35%) treatment-emergent adverse events in PEG + FOLFOX versus FOLFOX were thrombocytopenia (55% v 20%), anemia (40% v 16%), fatigue (61% v 45%), neutropenia (39% v 28%), abdominal pain (37% v 29%), nausea (45% v 41%), neuropathy (37% v 38%), and decreased appetite (35% v 31%). Exploratory analyses revealed increases in total IL-18, interferon (IFN)-γ, and granzyme B and decreases in transforming growth factor (TGF)-β with the addition of PEG. CONCLUSION PEG added to FOLFOX did not improve efficacy in advanced gemcitabine-refractory PDAC. Safety findings were consistent as previously observed from PEG with chemotherapy; toxicity was manageable and tolerable. Exploratory pharmacodynamic results were consistent with immunostimulatory signals of the IL-10R pathway.

Overall survival (OS) analysis from PRIME: Randomized phase III study of panitumumab (pmab) with FOLFOX4 for first-line metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 3620-3620 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean-Yves Douillard ◽  
Salvatore Siena ◽  
Josep Tabernero ◽  
Ronald L. Burkes ◽  
Mario Edmundo Barugel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Performance Status ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
First Line ◽  
Primary Analysis ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
Exon 2 ◽  
Kras Exon

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]

scholarly journals Gemcitabine Plus Cisplatin Versus Fluorouracil Plus Cisplatin as First-Line Therapy for Recurrent or Metastatic Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: Final Overall Survival Analysis of GEM20110714 Phase III Study

2021 ◽  
pp. JCO.21.00396
Author(s):  
Shaodong Hong ◽  
Yaxiong Zhang ◽  
Gengsheng Yu ◽  
Peijian Peng ◽  
Jiewen Peng ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Hazard Ratio ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
End Point ◽  
Metastatic Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma ◽  
Phase Iii Study

PURPOSE GEM20110714 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01528618 ), the first randomized, phase III study of systemic chemotherapy in recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC), reported significant progression-free survival improvement with gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GP) versus fluorouracil plus cisplatin (FP; hazard ratio, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.68; P < .001). Data from the final analysis of overall survival (OS) are presented here. METHODS From February 2012 to October 2015, 362 patients were randomly assigned to receive either GP (gemcitabine 1 g/m2 once daily on days 1 and 8 and cisplatin 80 mg/m2 once daily on day 1; n = 181) or FP (fluorouracil 4 g/m2 in continuous intravenous infusion over 96 hours and cisplatin 80 mg/m2 once daily on day 1; n = 181) once every 21 days. The primary end point was progression-free survival, which has been previously reported; OS was a secondary end point. RESULTS After a median follow-up time of 69.5 months with GP and 69.7 months with FP, 148 (81.8%) and 166 (91.7%) deaths occurred in the GP and FP arms, respectively. The estimated hazard ratio for OS was 0.72 (95% CI, 0.58 to 0.90; two-sided P = .004). The median OS was 22.1 months (95% CI, 19.2 to 25.0 months) with GP versus 18.6 months (95% CI, 15.4 to 21.7 months) with FP. The OS probabilities at 1, 3, and 5 years were 79.9% versus 71.8%, 31.0% versus 20.4%, and 19.2% versus 7.8%, respectively. Poststudy therapy was administered in 51.9% and 55.2% of patients in the GP and FP arms, respectively. CONCLUSION Among patients with previously untreated advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma, those who receive GP have longer OS than those receive FP. Gemcitabine plus cisplatin should be considered a preferred front-line option for these patients.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document