A randomized phase II study of gemcitabine (G) alone or with pazopanib (P) in refractory soft tissue sarcoma (STS).

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 11515-11515
Author(s):  
Christopher W. Ryan ◽  
Catherine Degnin ◽  
Lee D. Cranmer ◽  
Yiyi Chen ◽  
Seth Pollack ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Statistical Power ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Wilcoxon Test ◽  
Double Blind Study ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Randomized Phase Ii ◽  
Common Grade ◽  
Grade 3

11515 Background: Both G and P are active single-agents in the treatment of STS. We hypothesized that the anti-VEGF-R activity of P could augment the efficacy of G and conducted this study of G+P vs G+placebo (0). Methods: In this multi-center, double-blind study, eligibility included metastatic STS with receipt of 1–3 prior systemic regimens inclusive of an anthracycline. Patients (pts) were stratified by sarcoma subtype (liposarcoma (LPS) vs. other) and study site, then randomly assigned 1:1 to receive G 1000 mg/m2 IV over 30 minutes on days 1 and 8 every 21 days plus either P 800 mg PO or matching 0 daily. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Results: 54 pts were accrued from 2012–2019, Accrual was halted prior to the planned N of 80 due to withdrawal of funding. There were no differences in pt characteristics between the two arms including age (median = 60), sex (M/F 52/48%), histology (LPS 30%, leiomyosarcoma 26%, UPS 15%, synovial 11%, other 17%) and number of prior systemic therapies (median = 1). With a median follow-up of 19.1 months, PFS favored G+P and was significant using the Gehan-Wilcoxon test which favorably weighs earlier events (table). The response rate was 6.9% on the G+P arm and 8.0% on the G+0 arm; response rate was 22% for LPS treated with G+P. The most common grade ≥3 AEs (G+P v G+0) were: neutropenia (41% vs 40), hypertension (17% v 4), anemia (7% v 12). One patient died of hepatic failure on the G+P arm. Conclusions: This study demonstrated improved PFS with G+P as compared with G alone. Early termination limited statistical power. G+P is active in LPS, although P regulatory labeling currently limits use for LPS. Clinical trial information: NCT01532687 . [Table: see text]

Updated results of BICC-C study comparing first-line irinotecan/fluoropymidine combinations with or without celecoxib in mCRC: Updated efficacy data

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4027-4027 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Fuchs ◽  
J. Marshall ◽  
E. Mitchell ◽  
R. Wierzbicki ◽  
V. Ganju ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Survival Rate ◽  
Randomized Study ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
First Line ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Period 2 ◽  
Common Grade ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
One Year

4027 Background: This multicenter, randomized study assessed efficacy & safety for irinotecan/fluoropyrimidines combinations in previously untreated mCRC. Methods: Pts were randomized to: infusional FOLFIRI, modified bolus IFL (mIFL), or CapeIri; and concurrent celecoxib or placebo in a double-blind fashion. The protocol was amended in April 2004: bevacizumab (bev) was added to the FOLFIRI and mIFL arms, whereas CapeIri was discontinued. Period 1 (P1) and Period 2 (P2) designate subjects enrolled before or after the amendment. Initial efficacy & safety analyses were reported at ASCO ’06. We now report follow-up of 46 months for P1 and 31 months for P2. Results: 430 pts were treated in P1 and 117 pts in P2. Baseline characteristics and post-study treatment were balanced. P1 results: Median progression free survival (PFS) was 7.6 mos for FOLFIRI; 5.9 mos for mIFL (p=0.004); and 5.8 mos for CapeIri (p=0.015). Median overall survival (OS) was 23.1 mos for FOLFIRI; 17.6 mos for mIFL (p=0.087); and 18.9 mos for CapeIri (p=0.27). One-year survival rate favored FOLFIRI (75%) compared to either mIFL (65%) or CapeIri (66%). Overall Response Rate (ORR) was 47% in FOLFIRI, 43% in mIFL, 39% in CapeIri (not significantly different). P2 results: Median PFS was 11.2 mos for FOLFIRI+bev and 8.3 mos for mIFL+bev (p=0.28). Median OS was not reached for FOLFIRI+bev but was 19.2 mos for mIFL+bev (p=0.007). One-year survival rate favored FOLFIRI+bev (87%) when compared to mIFL+bev (61%). ORR was 58% for FOLFIRI+bev and 54% for mIFL+bev (p=0.73). Common grade = 3 AEs are listed below. Celecoxib did not impact safety or efficacy. Conclusions: First line FOLFIRI or FOLFIRI+bev were superior to their comparators and show favorable results in survival and tolerability in untreated mCRC. Median survival for FOLFIRI+bev has not been reached. [Table: see text] No significant financial relationships to disclose.

scholarly journals ACTR-24. A RANDOMIZED PHASE II TRIAL OF VELIPARIB (V), RADIOTHERAPY (RT) AND TEMOZOLOMIDE (TMZ) IN PATIENTS (PTS) WITH UNMETHYLATED MGMT (uMGMT) GLIOBLASTOMA (GBM): THE VERTU STUDY

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (Supplement_6) ◽  
pp. vi18-vi18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mustafa Khasraw ◽  
Kerrie Leanne McDonald ◽  
Mark Rosenthal ◽  
Zarnie Lwin ◽  
David Ashley ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
De Novo ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Extent Of Resection ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Phase 2 Trial ◽  
Randomized Phase Ii ◽  
Common Grade ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract BACKGROUND TMZ offers minimal benefit in pts with de novo uMGMT GBM. V is synergistic with RT and TMZ in uMGMT preclinical GBM models, safe when combined with either RT or TMZ clinically, but the triplet (V+RT+TMZ) is poorly tolerated. VERTU tested V in pts with uMGMT GBM. METHODS VERTU is a randomized Phase 2 trial comparing Standard Arm (Arm A), RT (60Gy/30 fractions) + TMZ (75mg/m2 daily) followed by TMZ (150–200mg/m2D 1–5) every 28 days for 6 cycles vs Experimental Arm (Arm B), RT (60Gy/30 fractions) + V (200mg PO BID) followed by TMZ (150–200mg/m2D 1–5) + V (40mg bid, D 1–7) every 28 days for 6 cycles in pts with de novo uMGMT GBM according to centralised testing. RESULTS 125 pts were randomized 1:2 (41:84). The 2 groups were matched for age, sex, performance status and extent of resection. Median follow-up was 25.8 months and 91 pts had died. The 6-month Progression-Free Survival (6mPFS) for Arms A and B were 34% (95% CI 20–48) and 46% (95% CI 36–57) respectively. The median PFS for Arms A and B were 4.2m (95% CI 2.5–6.0) and 5.7m (95% CI 4.1–6.6) respectively (HR = 0.80, 95%CI 0.55–1.18). 55% of pts in both arms experienced Grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs) with no significant differences in frequency or severity between the arms. Most common Grade 3/4 AEs were thrombocytopenia, seizures, hyperglycaemia and diarrhoea. CONCLUSION VERTU demonstrated that a novel treatment strategy for patients with de novo uMGMT GBM was feasible and tolerable. The observed 6mPFS and PFS were similar in both arms. Overall survival and other endpoints will be presented. Central MRI review, biomarker analyses, including DNA repair and methylation signature analyses are ongoing. (ANZCTR#ACTRN12615000407594).

scholarly journals Melflufen and Dexamethasone in Heavily Pretreated Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma

2020 ◽  
pp. JCO.20.02259
Author(s):  
Paul G. Richardson ◽  
Albert Oriol ◽  
Alessandra Larocca ◽  
Joan Bladé ◽  
Michele Cavo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Overall Response Rate ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Duration Of Response ◽  
Heavily Pretreated ◽  
Grade 3

PURPOSE Melphalan flufenamide (melflufen) is a first-in-class peptide-drug conjugate that targets aminopeptidases and rapidly and selectively releases alkylating agents into tumor cells. The phase II HORIZON trial evaluated the efficacy of melflufen plus dexamethasone in relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM), a population with an important unmet medical need. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with RRMM refractory to pomalidomide and/or an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody received melflufen 40 mg intravenously on day 1 of each 28-day cycle plus once weekly oral dexamethasone at a dose of 40 mg (20 mg in patients older than 75 years). The primary end point was overall response rate (partial response or better) assessed by the investigator and confirmed by independent review. Secondary end points included duration of response, progression-free survival, overall survival, and safety. The primary analysis is complete with long-term follow-up ongoing. RESULTS Of 157 patients (median age 65 years; median five prior lines of therapy) enrolled and treated, 119 patients (76%) had triple-class–refractory disease, 55 (35%) had extramedullary disease, and 92 (59%) were refractory to previous alkylator therapy. The overall response rate was 29% in the all-treated population, with 26% in the triple-class–refractory population. In the all-treated population, median duration of response was 5.5 months, median progression-free survival was 4.2 months, and median overall survival was 11.6 months at a median follow-up of 14 months. Grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 96% of patients, most commonly neutropenia (79%), thrombocytopenia (76%), and anemia (43%). Pneumonia (10%) was the most common grade 3/4 nonhematologic event. Thrombocytopenia and bleeding (both grade 3/4 but fully reversible) occurred concomitantly in four patients. GI events, reported in 97 patients (62%), were predominantly grade 1/2 (93%); none were grade 4. CONCLUSION Melflufen plus dexamethasone showed clinically meaningful efficacy and a manageable safety profile in patients with heavily pretreated RRMM, including those with triple-class–refractory and extramedullary disease.

Randomized phase II trial of irofulven (IROF)/prednisone (P), IROF/capecitabine (C)/P or mitoxantrone (M)/P in docetaxel-pretreated hormone refractory prostate cancer (HRPC) patients (pts)

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 14513-14513 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Hart ◽  
T. Ciuleanu ◽  
J. Hainsworth ◽  
S. Oudard ◽  
E. R. Berger ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Site Distribution ◽  
Randomized Phase Ii ◽  
Common Grade ◽  
Psa Response ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
M 12 ◽  
Hormone Refractory ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Semisynthetic Derivative

14513 Background: IROF, a semisynthetic derivative of the natural product illudin S, is a novel DNA binding agent. IROF alone or in combination has shown activity in phase I-II trials in HRPC, notably with IROF/C (Cvitkovic et al, ASCO 2004). Methods: Pts with histologically-proven metastatic HRPC who progressed (RECIST or PSA) during prior docetaxel or within 3 months of discontinuing treatment, with adequate hematologic and organ functions and KPS ≥70% were stratified by pain and randomized to one of three treatments: Arm A: IROF (0.45 mg/kg, day 1 and 8 q3weeks [w]) and P (10 mg po daily); Arm B: IROF (0.4 mg/kg day 1 and 15), C(2000 mg/m2 day 1–15 q4w) and P; or Arm C: M (12 mg/m2 q3w) and P. Primary endpoint was TTP (RECIST, PSA or clinical progression); secondary endpoints included PSA response (≥50% decrease for ≥4 w), pain response, and toxicity; 135 pts are planned in a 2:2:1 ratio. The study was powered to detect a difference in TTP of 1.5 vs 3 months. Results: As of Dec 2005, 78 pts were randomized and treated with ≥ 5 months follow-up (A/B/C: 31/31/16). Median age (A/B/C) 69/70/61, KPS ≥80% 24/28/9, median baseline PSA ng/mL 90/147/235, disease related pain at baseline 61%/58%/63%; other characteristics, including metastatic site distribution, were similar between arms. Safety: 65 pts were evaluated for safety. Median cycles/Pt (A, B, C) 3/2/2; grade 3/4 toxicities (% pts A, B, C): asthenia (4%, 16%, 0%), vomiting (0%, 12%, 0%) and diarrhea (4%, 8%, 0%). The most common grade 3/4 laboratory abnormalities were neutropenia (10%, 6%, 31%) and thrombocytopenia (15%, 12%, 0%). Conclusion: IROF in combination with P and, in particular, C/P shows improved activity and acceptable tolerance compared to M/P in docetaxel-resistant HRPC. Patient accrual is complete as of Jan 2006, and final results will be presented. [Table: see text] [Table: see text]

A randomized phase II trial comparing pulsed erlotinib before or after carboplatin and paclitaxel in patients with stage IIIB or IV non-small cell lung cancer

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 7619-7619 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. J. Riely ◽  
C. M. Rudin ◽  
M. G. Kris ◽  
E. Senturk ◽  
C. G. Azzoli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Advanced Nsclc ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Phase Ii Trial ◽  
Stage Iiib ◽  
Preclinical Models ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
Randomized Phase Ii ◽  
Pulsatile Administration ◽  
Common Grade ◽  
Grade 3

7619 Background: A randomized phase 3 trial failed to show any improvement in response rate (RR) or overall survival (OS) when erlotinib was added to carboplatin and paclitaxel (TRIBUTE). However, preclinical data suggested that administration of erlotinib before or after chemotherapy may improve efficacy of chemotherapy [Gumerlock et al ASCO 2003, Solit et al Clin Can Res 2005]. We designed this trial to test the hypothesis that administration of pulsed erlotinib prior to or following chemotherapy would improve the response rate in patients with advanced NSCLC. Methods: All patients had chemotherapy naive, stage IIIB or IV NSCLC and were former or current smokers. All patients received carboplatin (AUC 6) and paclitaxel (200 mg/m2). Patients were randomly assigned to one of three arms: erlotinib 150 mg days 1,2, and chemotherapy on day 3; erlotinib 1500 mg days 1, 2 and chemotherapy on day 3; or chemotherapy on day 1 and erlotinib 1500 mg on days 2,3. Patients received up to six 21-day cycles of treatment. The primary endpoint was overall RR (CR+PR) using RECIST. We planned to enroll 29 patients to each arm in a “pick the winner” design comparing arms to the chemotherapy alone arm of TRIBUTE (RR 19%) with a desirable RR of 50%. Results: Eighty-seven patients were randomized to 3 arms. Accrual is complete. The most common grade 3/4 toxicities were neutropenia (39%), fatigue (15%), and anemia (12%). Grade 3/4 rash or diarrhea were uncommon. Conclusions: Treatment with erlotinib before (150 mg on days 1 and 2 or 1500 mg on days 1 and 2) or after (1500 mg on days 2 and 3) administration of carboplatin and paclitaxel failed to improve response rates compared to TRIBUTE. The benefit of pulsatile administration of erlotinib predicted by preclinical models was not evident in this clinical trial. Supported by Genentech, Inc. [Table: see text] [Table: see text]

NGR-hTNF and doxorubicin in relapsed ovarian cancer (OC).

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 5059-5059
Author(s):  
Domenica Lorusso ◽  
Giovanni Scambia ◽  
Giulia Amadio ◽  
Alessia di Legge ◽  
Antonella Pietragalla ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Median Duration ◽  
Human Tumor ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Phase 2 Trial ◽  
Randomized Phase Ii ◽  
Common Grade ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Necrosis Factor

5059 Background: NGR-hTNF (asparagine-glycine-arginine human tumor necrosis factor) is able to promote antitumor immune responses and to improve the intratumoral doxorubicin (D) uptake by selectively damaging tumor vessels. Methods: OC patients (pts) with progressive disease (PD) after ≥ 1 platinum/taxane regimen and with a platinum free interval lower than 6 months (PFI <6) or ranging from 6 to 12 months (PFI 6-12) received NGR-hTNF (N) 0.8 µg/m2 and D 60 mg/m2 on day 1 every 3 weeks. Primary endpoint of this phase 2 trial was response rate by RECIST criteria with a target of ≥ 6/37 responding pts. Secondary aims were progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Results: 37 pts (median age 57 years; PS 0/1 32/5; PFI < 6/6-12 25/12; prior regimens 1-5) were enrolled. Median baseline peripheral blood lymphocyte count (PBLC) was 1.6/mL (interquartile range 1.2-2.1). In all, 177 cycles were given, with 18 pts (49%) receiving ≥ 6 cycles and 12 pts (32%) 8 cycles. Neither grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs) related to N nor increase of D-related AEs were noted. Common grade 1/2 AEs included chills (65%). Eight pts (23%; 95% CI 12-39) had partial response (PR; 2 with PFI < 6 and 6 with PFI 6-12; median duration: 8.2 months). Fifteen pts had stable disease (SD, 43%; 10 with PFI < 6 and 5 with PFI 6-12; median duration: 4.9 months) for an overall disease control (DC, PR+SD) rate of 66%. Mean changes from baseline in target tumor size after 2, 4, 6, and 8 cycles were 2%, -54%, -69%, and -77%, respectively. Median PFS was 5.0 months (95% CI 3.1-6.9) and median OS was 17.0 months (10.4-23.6). In pts with PFI < 6 or 6-12, median PFS were 3.8 and 7.8 months (p=.03) and median OS were 14.3 and 20.1 months (p=.14), respectively. Pts with DC had longer median OS than those with early PD (24.0 and 4.9 months, respectively, p=.02). Longer PFI (p=.03) and higher PBLC (p=.01) were associated with better PFS, while OS correlated only with PBLC (p=.001). In the subset with PFI < 6, pts with PBLC ≥ or < 1.2/mL (1st quartile) had median PFS of 4.9 and 2.6 months (p=.02) and median OS of 15.8 and 4.3 months (p=.0001), respectivel Conclusions: A randomized phase II trial is currently testing D ± NGR-hTNF in pts with PFI < 6 (refractory/resistant). The role of PBLC as blood-based biomarker deserves further investigation.

Efficacy and tolerability of bevacizumab (BEV) plus capecitabine and cisplatin (XP) in Chinese patients (pts) with locally advanced or metastatic gastric/gastroesophageal junction cancer (AGC): Results from the AVATAR study.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 73-73 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lin Shen ◽  
Jin Li ◽  
Jian-Ming Xu ◽  
Hong-Ming Pan ◽  
Guanghai Dai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastroesophageal Junction ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Chinese Patients ◽  
Double Blind Study ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Grade 3

73 Background: In the AVAGAST study, chemotherapy (fluoropyrimidine and cisplatin) + BEV did not significantly improve overall survival (OS) vs. chemotherapy + placebo. Geographic differences in efficacy were observed, but only 12 Chinese pts were included. AVATAR, a study similar in design to AVAGAST, is a randomized double-blind study conducted exclusively in China in pts with AGC. Methods: Pts aged >18 years with gastric adenocarcinoma were randomized 1:1 to XP + BEV 7.5 mg/kg or placebo + XP. The primary objective was OS; secondary objectives included progression-free survival (PFS) and safety. Results: Baseline characteristics of the 202 pts were well balanced. The primary efficacy endpoint of improved OS in the BEV arm was not met (HR 1.11, 95% CI 0.79–1.56; p=0.5567; see table ). BEV + XP was well tolerated. Grade 3–5 adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs were 60% and 19% for BEV and 68% vs. 21% for placebo, respectively. Grade 3–5 AEs of special interest with BEV occurred in 8% of BEV pts and 15% of placebo pts; the difference was mainly due to grade 3–5 haemorrhage (BEV 4%, placebo 12%). Conclusions: Addition of BEV to XP in Chinese pts with AGC did not significantly improve outcomes in AVATAR. The results from AVATAR are consistent with the findings seen in the Asian sub-population of the previous AVAGAST study. [Table: see text]

Results of a phase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of pegfilgrastim (PEG) in patients (pts) receiving first-line FOLFOX or FOLFIRI and bevacizumab (B) for colorectal cancer (CRC).

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 3575-3575
Author(s):  
Tamas Pinter ◽  
Esteban Abella ◽  
Alvydas Cesas ◽  
Adina Croitoru ◽  
Jochen Decaestecker ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
First Line ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Clinically Significant ◽  
Grade 3

3575 Background: The literature reports that adding biologics to chemotherapy (ctx) may increase the incidence of clinically significant neutropenia. his trial was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of PEG in reducing the incidence of febrile neutropenia (FN) in pts with locally-advanced (LA) or metastatic (m)CRC receiving first-line treatment with either FOLFOX/B or FOLFIRI/B. Methods: Key eligibility: ≥ 18 years old; measurable, nonresectable CRC per RECIST 1.1. Pts were randomly assigned 1:1 to either placebo or 6 mg PEG ~24 h after ctx/B. The study treatment period included four Q2W cycles, but pts could continue their assigned regimen until progression. Pts were stratified by region (North America vs rest of world), stage (LA vs mCRC), and ctx (FOLFOX vs FOLFIRI). Estimated sample size (N = 800) was based on the expected incidence of grade 3/4 FN (primary endpoint) across the first 4 cycles of ctx/B, powered for PEG superiority over placebo. Other endpoints included overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Results: 845 pts were randomized (Nov 2009 to Jan 2012) and received study treatment; 783 pts completed 4 cycles of ctx/B. Median age was 61 years; 512 (61%) pts were male; 819 (97%) had mCRC; 414 (49%) received FOLFOX, and 431 (51%) received FOLFIRI. Grade 3/4 FN (first 4 cycles) for placebo vs PEG was 5.7% vs 2.4%; OR 0.41; p = 0.014. A similar incidence of other ≥ grade 3 adverse events was seen in both arms (28% placebo; 27% PEG). See table for additional results. Conclusions: PEG significantly reduced the incidence of grade 3/4 FN in this pt population receiving standard ctx/B for CRC. Follow-up is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT00911170. [Table: see text]

Olaparib plus paclitaxel in patients with recurrent or metastatic gastric cancer: A randomized, double-blind phase II study.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4013-4013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yung-Jue Bang ◽  
Seock-Ah Im ◽  
Keun-Wook Lee ◽  
Jae Yong Cho ◽  
Eun-Kee Song ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Parp Inhibitor ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Metastatic Gastric Cancer ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Protein Levels ◽  
Common Grade ◽  
Atm Protein ◽  
Grade 3

4013 Background: Our multicenter study compared the efficacy of the oral PARP inhibitor olaparib plus paclitaxel (O/P) vs paclitaxel alone (P) as second-line therapy in pts with recurrent/metastatic gastric cancer (GC) (NCT01063517). As initial preclinical data suggested that responsiveness of GC cell lines to olaparib was associated with low ATM protein levels, our study was enriched for pts with low ATM tumors (ATM–) by IHC (50% randomized vs 14% screening prevalence). Methods: Eligible pts were randomized 1:1 (stratified by ATM status) to receiveolaparib 100 mg bid (tablet form) plus paclitaxel (80 mg/m2 iv on days 1, 8, 15 per 28-day cycle) or placebo plus paclitaxel until progression or investigator decision. After combination therapy, pts could take olaparib 200 mg bid monotherapy or placebo until progression. Co-primary endpoints: progression-free survival (PFS; RECIST v1.1) in all pts and ATM– pts. Secondary endpoints: overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), safety. Results: 123/124 randomized pts were treated (O/P=61; P=62). Baseline characteristics were generally well balanced. Use of post-progression therapy was similar in both arms (O/P=48.4%; P=43.5%) as was median paclitaxel duration (O/P=17 wks; P=16 wks); 18 pts received monotherapy (O/P=11; P=7). More pts in the O/P than P arm had delays (79 vs 63%) and reductions (41 vs 27%) in paclitaxel dosing. The most common grade ≥3 AEs in the O/P and P arms were neutropenia (56 vs 39%) and anemia (11 vs 11%). Conclusions: Olaparib plus paclitaxel was well tolerated and led to a statistically significant improvement in OS, but not PFS, vs paclitaxel alone in both all pts and ATM– pts, with a larger benefit in ATM– pts. Clinical trial information: NCT01063517. [Table: see text]

LOTUS (NCT02162719): A double-blind placebo (PBO)-controlled randomized phase II trial of first-line ipatasertib (IPAT) + paclitaxel (P) for metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC).

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1009-1009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca Alexandra Dent ◽  
Sung-Bae Kim ◽  
Seock-Ah Im ◽  
Marc Espie ◽  
Sibel Blau ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Objective Response ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Dose Intensity ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Akt Inhibitor ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Common Grade ◽  
Duration Of Response ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Median Cumulative Dose

1009 Background: The oral Akt inhibitor IPAT is being evaluated in cancers with a high prevalence of PI3K/Akt pathway activation, including TNBC. Methods: Eligible patients (pts) had measurable inoperable locally advanced/metastatic TNBC previously untreated with systemic therapy. Pts were stratified by prior (neo)adjuvant therapy, chemotherapy-free interval and tumor PTEN status, and randomized 1:1 to P 80 mg/m2 (d1, 8 & 15) with either IPAT 400 mg or PBO (d1–21) q28d until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Co-primary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) in the ITT population and pts with PTEN-low tumors by IHC. Secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), duration of response (DoR) and overall survival in the ITT and IHC PTEN-low populations, efficacy in pts with PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN-altered tumors by next-generation sequencing (NGS), and safety. Results: Baseline characteristics were generally balanced between arms. Efficacy is shown below. The most common grade ≥3 AEs (grouped terms) were diarrhea (23% IPAT+P vs 0% PBO+P; no grade 4 or colitis in either arm), neutropenia (18% vs 8%), asthenia (5% vs 6%), peripheral neuropathy (5% vs 5%) and pneumonia (5% vs 0%). More pts receiving IPAT+P than PBO+P had an AE leading to dose reduction of IPAT/PBO (21% vs 6%) or P (38% vs 11%) but median cumulative dose intensity was similar (IPAT/PBO: 99% vs 100%; P: 100% vs 100%). AEs led to IPAT/PBO discontinuation in 13% vs 11% of pts, respectively; 2 pts (3%) discontinued IPAT for grade 3 diarrhea. Conclusions: Adding IPAT to P for TNBC modestly improved PFS in the ITT pts. The effect was more pronounced in the prespecified subgroup with PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN alterations, warranting further evaluation of IPAT in these pts. AEs were manageable. Clinical trial information: NCT02162719. [Table: see text]

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document