Irinotecan, cetuximab, and bevacizumab (CBI) versus irinotecan, cetuximab, and placebo (CI) in irinotecan-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): Results from an ACCRU network randomized phase II trial.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 102-102
Author(s):  
Marla Lipsyc-Sharf ◽  
Fang-Shu Ou ◽  
Matthew B. Yurgelun ◽  
Douglas Adam Rubinson ◽  
Deborah Schrag ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase Ii ◽  
Phase Ii Trial ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Growth Factor Receptor ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Cox Proportional Hazard Models ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Line Of Therapy

102 Background: Combination irinotecan and cetuximab is approved for irinotecan-refractory mCRC; it is unknown if the addition of bevacizumab would improve outcomes. We studied the efficacy and safety of CBI compared with CI in patients (pts) with RAS wildtype, irinotecan-refractory mCRC. Methods: In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase II trial, pts with RAS wildtype mCRC and no prior anti-epidermal growth factor receptor therapy who failed at least 1 irinotecan-based chemotherapy regimen and received bevacizumab in at least 1 prior line of therapy were randomized 1:1 to irinotecan 180 mg/m2 (or previously tolerated dose), cetuximab 500 mg/m2, and bevacizumab 5 mg/kg vs CI every 2 wks until disease progression, intolerable toxicity, or withdrawal of consent. The primary endpoint was progression free survival (PFS). Multivariable Cox proportional hazard models stratified by number of prior lines of therapy and bevacizumab receipt in immediate prior line were performed. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and adverse events (AEs). The study was closed early in January 2018 for reasons related to accrual and funding after enrollment of 36 out of a planned 60 pts. Results: Between July 2015 and December 2017, 36 pts were randomized (19 to CBI, 17 to CI). 34 pts (94%) were treated with 2 or more prior chemotherapy regimens. Baseline characteristics were similar between arms. Median PFS was 9.7 vs 5.5 mo for CBI and CI arms, respectively (log-rank P =0.76; multivariable HR = 0.64; 95% CI, 0.25-1.66). Median OS was 19.7 vs 10.2 mo for CBI and CI (log-rank P= 0.04; multivariable HR = 0.41; 95% CI, 0.15-1.09). ORR was 37% for CBI vs 12% for CI ( P =0.13). Grade 3 or higher AEs occurred in 47% of pts receiving CBI vs 35% for CI ( P =0.46). Conclusions: In this prematurely discontinued trial, there were non-significant increases in PFS and ORR and a statistically significant 9.5 mo increase in median OS in favor of CBI compared to CI. Further investigation of CBI for treatment of irinotecan-refractory mCRC is warranted. Clinical trial information: NCT02292758.

Vandetanib versus erlotinib in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after failure of at least one prior cytotoxic chemotherapy: A randomized, double-blind phase III trial (ZEST)

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 8009-8009
Author(s):  
R. B. Natale ◽  
S. Thongprasert ◽  
F. A. Greco ◽  
M. Thomas ◽  
C. M. Tsai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Equivalent Efficacy ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
Previously Treated ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
To Receive

8009 Background: Vandetanib is a once-daily oral inhibitor of VEGFR, EGFR and RET signaling. This phase III study compared the efficacy of vandetanib vs erlotinib in patients (pts) with advanced, previously treated NSCLC. Methods: Eligible pts (stage IIIB/IV NSCLC, PS 0–2, 1–2 prior chemotherapies; all histologies permitted) were randomized 1:1 to receive vandetanib 300 mg/day or erlotinib 150 mg/day until progression/toxicity. The primary objective was to show superiority in progression-free survival (PFS) for vandetanib vs erlotinib. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), time to deterioration of symptoms (TDS; EORTC QoL Questionnaire) and safety. Results: Between Oct 06-Nov 07, 1240 pts (mean age 61 yrs; 38% female; 22% squamous) were randomized to receive vandetanib (n=623) or erlotinib (n=617). Baseline characteristics were similar in both arms. Median duration of follow-up was 14 months, with 88% pts progressed and 67% dead. There was no difference in PFS for pts treated with vandetanib vs erlotinib (hazard ratio [HR] 0.98, 95.22% CI 0.87–1.10; P=0.721), and no difference in the secondary endpoints of OS (HR 1.01, 95.08% CI 0.89–1.16; P=0.830), ORR (both 12%) and TDS (pain: HR 0.92, P=0.289; dyspnea: HR 1.07, P=0.407; cough: HR 0.94, P=0.455). A preplanned non-inferiority analysis for PFS and OS demonstrated equivalent efficacy for vandetanib and erlotinib. The adverse events (AEs) observed for vandetanib were generally consistent with previous NSCLC studies with vandetanib 300 mg. There was a higher incidence of some AEs (any grade) with vandetanib vs erlotinib, including diarrhea (50% vs 38%) and hypertension (16% vs 2%); rash was more frequent with erlotinib (38% vs 28%). The overall incidence of CTCAE grade ≥3 AEs was also higher with vandetanib (50% vs 40%). The incidence of protocol-defined QTc prolongation in the vandetanib arm was 5%. Conclusions: The study did not meet its primary objective of demonstrating PFS prolongation with vandetanib vs erlotinib in pts with previously treated advanced NSCLC. However, vandetanib and erlotinib showed equivalent efficacy for PFS and OS in a preplanned non-inferiority analysis. [Table: see text]

Palbociclib plus cetuximab versus placebo plus cetuximab in platinum-resistant, cetuximab-naive, HPV-unrelated head and neck cancer: A double-blind randomized phase II trial (PALATINUS).

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6013-6013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Douglas Adkins ◽  
Jin-Ching Lin ◽  
Assuntina Gesualda Sacco ◽  
Jessica C. Ley ◽  
Peter Oppelt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Head And Neck ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Phase Ii Trial ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Growth Factor Receptor ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Platinum Resistant ◽  
Randomized Phase Ii

6013 Background: Cetuximab monotherapy results in a median overall survival (OS) of approximately 6 months (mo) in platinum-resistant recurrent/metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). HNSCC unrelated to human papillomavirus (HPV) is driven by hyperactivation of the CDK4/6 and cyclin D1 (CD1) regulatory complex, resulting in cell cycle progression and tumor growth, suggesting that CDK4/6 inhibition can be a rational therapeutic strategy in this setting. Palbociclib (PAL) is a selective CDK4/6 inhibitor that may reverse cetuximab resistance by countering the actions of deregulated CD1. PAL plus an epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor synergistically reduced cell viability of HPV-unrelated HNSCC cell lines. In a single-arm, multicenter trial of platinum-resistant, cetuximab-naive, HPV-unrelated HNSCC, PAL in combination with cetuximab resulted in a median OS of 9.5 mo. Methods: In a double-blind randomized phase II trial, patients (pts) with platinum-resistant, cetuximab-naïve, HPV-unrelated HNSCC were treated with cetuximab plus either PAL (arm A) or placebo (arm B). Pts were stratified by performance status (PS) and prior immunotherapy (IT). 120 pts were required for 1:1 randomization to have ≥ 80% power to detect a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.6 (corresponding to a median OS of 10 mo in arm A and 6 mo in arm B) using a 1-sided log-rank test P=0.10). Key secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), adverse events (AEs), and p16 status. Results: Pts (n=125) were randomized (arm A, 65; arm B, 60). PS and prior IT were balanced between the arms. Median (95% CI) follow-up for OS was 15.9 (15.0–19.4) mo. Median OS was 9.7 (7.3–13.9) mo in arm A and 7.8 (6.7–10.6) mo in Arm B (stratified by PS: HR=0.82 [95% CI, 0.54–1.25], P=0.18). Median PFS was 3.9 mo in arm A and 4.6 mo in arm B (stratified by PS: HR=1.00 [0.7–1.5], P=0.5). Hematologic AEs were more common in arm A. Only 11 pts (9%) received IT after being treated on the trial. Conclusions: Among pts with platinum-resistant, HPV-unrelated HNSCC, PAL plus cetuximab resulted in a trend of prolongation of median OS compared with cetuximab. Clinical trial information: NCT02499120.

scholarly journals Pimasertib Versus Dacarbazine in Patients With Unresectable NRAS-Mutated Cutaneous Melanoma: Phase II, Randomized, Controlled Trial with Crossover

Cancers ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (7) ◽  
pp. 1727 ◽  
Author(s):  
Celeste Lebbé ◽  
Caroline Dutriaux ◽  
Thierry Lesimple ◽  
Willem Kruit ◽  
Joseph Kerger ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase Ii ◽  
Cutaneous Melanoma ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Serious Adverse Events ◽  
Unresectable Stage ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
Grade 3

This study investigated the efficacy and safety of pimasertib (MEK1/MEK2 inhibitor) versus dacarbazine (DTIC) in patients with untreated NRAS-mutated melanoma. Phase II, multicenter, open-label trial. Patients with unresectable, stage IIIc/IVM1 NRAS-mutated cutaneous melanoma were randomized 2:1 to pimasertib (60 mg; oral twice-daily) or DTIC (1000 mg/m2; intravenously) on Day 1 of each 21-day cycle. Patients progressing on DTIC could crossover to pimasertib. Primary endpoint: investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS); secondary endpoints: overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), quality of life (QoL), and safety. Overall, 194 patients were randomized (pimasertib n = 130, DTIC n = 64), and 191 received treatment (pimasertib n = 130, DTIC n = 61). PFS was significantly improved with pimasertib versus DTIC (median 13 versus 7 weeks, respectively; hazard ratio (HR) 0.59, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.42–0.83; p = 0.0022). ORR was improved with pimasertib (odds ratio 2.24, 95% CI 1.00–4.98; p = 0.0453). OS was similar between treatments (median 9 versus 11 months, respectively; HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.61–1.30); 64% of patients receiving DTIC crossed over to pimasertib. Serious adverse events (AEs) were more frequent for pimasertib (57%) than DTIC (20%). The most common treatment-emergent AEs were diarrhea (82%) and blood creatine phosphokinase (CPK) increase (68%) for pimasertib, and nausea (41%) and fatigue (38%) for DTIC. Most frequent grade ≥3 AEs were CPK increase (34%) for pimasertib and neutropenia (15%) for DTIC. Mean QoL scores (baseline and last assessment) were similar between treatments. Pimasertib has activity in NRAS-mutated cutaneous melanoma and a safety profile consistent with known toxicities of MEK inhibitors. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01693068.

scholarly journals Randomized Double-Blind Phase II Study of Regorafenib in Patients With Metastatic Osteosarcoma

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (16) ◽  
pp. 1424-1431 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lara E. Davis ◽  
Vanessa Bolejack ◽  
Christopher W. Ryan ◽  
Kristen N. Ganjoo ◽  
Elizabeth T. Loggers ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase Ii ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Multikinase Inhibitor ◽  
Prior Therapy ◽  
End Point ◽  
Metastatic Osteosarcoma ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Line Of Therapy

PURPOSE SARC024 is a phase II clinical trial of the multikinase inhibitor regorafenib in specific sarcoma subtypes, including advanced osteosarcoma. We hypothesized that regorafenib would improve progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with sarcoma and report the results of the osteosarcoma cohort. PATIENTS AND METHODS This trial enrolled patients with progressive metastatic osteosarcoma with measurable disease by RECIST who had received at least one prior line of therapy. Patients were randomly assigned at a ratio of one to one to regorafenib or placebo. Crossover was allowed at time of disease progression. PFS was the primary end point of the study, which was powered to detect a difference of at least 3 months in median PFS. RESULTS Forty-two patients from 12 centers were enrolled between September 2014 and May 2018. Median age was 37 years (range, 18 to 76 years). Patients had received an average of 2.3 prior therapy regimens. Ten patients receiving placebo crossed over to active drug at time of progression. Study enrollment was stopped early, after a data safety monitoring committee review. Median PFS was significantly improved with regorafenib versus placebo: 3.6 months (95% CI, 2.0 to 7.6 months) versus 1.7 months (95% CI, 1.2 to 1.8 months), respectively (hazard ratio, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.21 to 0.85; P = .017). In the context of the crossover design, there was no statistically significant difference in overall survival. Fourteen (64%) of 22 patients initially randomly assigned to regorafenib experienced grade 3 to 4 events attributed to treatment, including one grade 4 colonic perforation. CONCLUSION The study met its primary end point, demonstrating activity of regorafenib in patients with progressive metastatic osteosarcoma. No new safety signals were observed. Regorafenib should be considered a treatment option for patients with relapsed metastatic osteosarcoma.

Final analysis of a multi-center, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized phase II trial of gemcitabine/cisplatin (GC) plus bevacizumab (B) or placebo (P) in patients (pts) with malignant mesothelioma (MM)

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 7526-7526 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Karrison ◽  
H. L. Kindler ◽  
D. R. Gandara ◽  
C. Lu ◽  
T. L. Guterz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase Ii ◽  
Phase Ii Trial ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Phase Ii Trials ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Double Blind Placebo ◽  
Randomized Phase Ii ◽  
Major Vessel ◽  
Grade 3

7526 Background: In phase II trials in MM, GC on a 21-day (D) schedule has response rates of 16%–26% and median overall survival (OS) of 9.6–13 months (mo). Since VEGF has a key role in MM biology, we added anti-VEGF antibody B to GC in a multi-center, double- blind, placebo-controlled randomized phase II trial. Methods: Eligible pts had unresectable MM; no prior chemotherapy; PS 0–1; no thrombosis, bleeding, or major vessel invasion. Primary endpoint: progression-free survival (PFS). Statistics: 90% power to detect HR 0.57. Stratification: PS (0/1), histology (epithelial/other). G 1,250 mg/m2 D 1, 8 Q21D, C 75 mg/m2 D1 Q21D, and B 15 mg/kg or P D1 Q21D was given × 6 cycles, then B or P Q21D until progression. Baseline plasma VEGF was measured. 115 pts enrolled 12/01- 07/05 at 11 sites, 108 (GCB/GCP) 53/55 were evaluable. Male 74%/84%; median age 62/65 (range 44–78/20–84); PS 1 55%/47%; epithelial 74%/67%; pleural 93%/91%; thrombocytosis 40%/40%. Results: Cycles: total 458/424, median 7/6, range 1–42/2–39. Statistically significantly different (SSD) toxicity (p <0.05), any grade: alopecia 60%/38%; epistaxis 62%/24%; hypertension 45%/22%; non-neutropenic infection 15%/4%; proteinuria 62%/47%; stomatitis 23%/7%. There were no SSD toxicities = grade 3. Median PFS 6.9/6.0 mo (HR 0.93, p=0.88). Median OS 15.6/14.7 mo (p=0.91). 1-year survival 59%/57%. Partial response 25%/22%; stable disease 51%/60%. Median VEGF (N=56) 131/154 pg/ml (range 31–1760/5–1786). Higher VEGF was associated with shorter PFS (p=0.02) and OS (p=0.0066). In pts with VEGF = the median, PFS (p=0.043) and OS (p=0.028) were significantly greater for GCB than GCP; in high VEGF strata this was not SSD. Conclusion: Adding B to GC in MM pts does not yield statistically significant differences in PFS, OS, response, or grade ¾ toxicity. GCB-treated pts with low VEGF levels had longer PFS and OS. Supported by NCI grant N01-CM-17102. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

PARTNER: A randomized phase II study of docetaxel/cisplatin (doc/cis) chemotherapy with or without panitumumab (pmab) as first-line treatment (tx) for recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (R/M SCCHN).

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6029-6029 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lori J. Wirth ◽  
Shaker R. Dakhil ◽  
Gabriela Kornek ◽  
Rita Axelrod ◽  
Douglas Adkins ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase Ii ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Randomized Phase Ii ◽  
Hpv Status ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
Baseline Characteristics ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Clinical Trial Information

6029 Background: PARTNER was a multicenter, randomized phase II estimation study evaluating 1stEline tx of R/M SCCHN with doc/cis ± pmab. Methods: Patients (pts) were randomized 1:1 to doc/cis with pmab (Arm 1) or doc/cis alone (Arm 2). Arm 1 received 9 mg/kg pmab on day 1 of each 21-day cycle, and all pts received 1stEline doc/cis both at 75 mg/m2 on day 1 for up to 6 cycles. In Arm 1, pts could receive pmab monotherapy upon completion of 6 cycles of doc/cis until disease progression (PD). In Arm 2, pts could receive pmab as 2ndEline monotherapy upon PD. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and safety. HPV status was determined using p16 INK IHC. No formal hypothesis was tested. Results: Baseline characteristics were balanced between arms. Of 103 pts, HPV status was evaluable in 66 (64%); 29% were HPV positive. Efficacy results are shown (Table). Worst grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs) were 73% in Arm 1 vs 56% in Arm 2. Conclusions: Median PFS was increased in both arms over historical doublet cytotoxic chemotherapy. PFS and ORR were higher in the pmab arm in the overall population, in the HPV positive (n=19) group, and in the HPV negative (n=47) group. There was an increase in grade 3/4 AEs with this regimen. The crossover design, with 57% of Arm 2 pts receiving pmab as 2ndEline monotherapy, confounds interpretation of OS. Clinical trial information: NCT00454779. [Table: see text]

Anlotinib in chemotherapy-refractory metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC): A randomized, double-blind, multicenter phase II trial.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 95-95 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jing Huang ◽  
Juxiang Xiao ◽  
Wentao Fang ◽  
Ping Lu ◽  
Qingxia Fan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Kinase Inhibitor ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Growth Factor Receptor ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Duration Of Response ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Vegfr Inhibitor ◽  
Loss Of Appetite

95 Background: The treatment option for ESCC patients (pts) progressing after chemotherapy is still uncertain. Anlotinib is a multi-target tyrosine kinase inhibitor involved in tumor angiogenesis and growth, such as vascular endothelia growth factor receptor (VEGFR) 2/3, etc. Methods: Eligible pts were advanced ESCC who had progressed after platinum or taxane containing chemotherapy. Between January 6, 2016 and May 22, 2018, a total of 165 pts from 13 centers in China were randomly assigned (in a 2:1 ratio) to anlotinib arm (n=110), and placebo arm (n=55). Pts were given anlotinib (12 mg/day) or placebo orally from day 1 to day 14 in a 21-day cycle until disease progression or had unacceptable toxic effects. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Results: Median PFS was 3.0 months with anlotinib and 1.4 months with placebo (HR 0.5, 95% CI, 0.3-0.7; P<0.0001). Complete response occured in 2 pts with anlotinib and 0 pt with placebo. The objective response rates were 7% in the anlotinib group and 4% in the placebo group (P=0.498), and the disease control rates (DCR) were 64% and 18%, respectively (P<0.0001). In anlotinib arm, median duration of response was 5.8 months (range, 3.1-19.7+). Grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAE) were reported in 36.7% and 11.0% of the two group pts, and grade 5 TRAE were 2.8% and 0%, respectively. The most common grade 3/4 TRAE (>5%) in anlotinib arm were hypertension (15.6%) and loss of appetite (5.5%). Median overall survival were similar between the groups (6.1 months vs 7.2 months; HR 1.2, 95%CI 0.8-1.8, P=0.4261). The ratio of pts received post study treatments was 41.2% (40/97) in anlotinib arm and 72.7% (40/55) in placebo arm (P=0.0002), including chemotherapy (23.7% vs 54.6%), PD-1 inhibitors (4.1% vs 11.0%), and Apatinib, a VEGFR inhibitor, (10.3% vs 20.0%), etc. Conclusions: In pretreated advanced ESCC pts, anlotinib significantly improved PFS and DCR compared with placebo, with a manageable safety profile. Clinical trial information: NCT02649361.

151 A RANDOMIZED,OPEN CLINICAL TRIAL TO COMPARE THE EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF ANLOTINIB PLUS IRINOTECAN VERSUS IRINOTECAN IN PATIENTS WITH ESCC

2021 ◽  
Vol 34 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Feng Wang ◽  
Xiangrui Meng ◽  
Hangrui Liu ◽  
Qingxia Fan
Keyword(s):  
Disease Control ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Phase Ii Trial ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Thyroid Stimulating Hormone ◽  
Disease Control Rate ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Trial Group ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract   The benefit of systemic treatment in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) which has progressed after chemotherapy is still uncertain. Anlotinib (AL3818) is a novel multi-target TKI, inhibiting tumor angiogenesis and proliferation. A phase II trial (NCT02649361) has demonstrated that anlotinib has a durable antitumor activity with a manageable adverse event profile in refractory metastatic ESCC. This study (NCT03387904) aimed at comparing the effects and safety of Anlotinib Plus Irinotecan versus Irinotecan in patients with ESCC. Methods We conducted a prospective randomized, multicenter, phase II trial to compare the efficacy of Anlotinib Plus Irinotecan with Irinotecan in recurrent ESCC patients who had resistance to platinum or taxane-based chemotherapy. Eligible patients were adults with pathologically confirmed recurrent ESCC, and 82 patients were randomized 1:1 to Irinotecan (65 mg/m2/day 1 and day 8) with or without anlotinib (12 mg qd day 1 to 14) of a 21-day cycle till progression or intolerable. The primary endpoint is the disease control rate (DCR) and progression-free survival (PFS) and the secondary end points are objective response rate (ORR) and overall survival (OS). Results Between 13/1 2019 and 20/1 2020, a total of 43 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to either the anlotinib plus irinotecan (n = 22) or the irinotecan group (n = 21).The mPFS was longer in trial group than in control group (89 days vs 66 days, HR = 0.447, P = 0.055). The Disease control rate (DCR) was 54.5% in trial group and 38.1% in the control group. The treatment-related adverse events (&gt;10%) were fatigue (59.1%), nausea (50.0%), decreased appetite (36.4%), hoarseness (27.3%), thyroid-stimulating hormone elevation (22.7%), diarrhea (9.1%), and decreased lymphocytes count(9.1%) in trial group. Grade 3 AEs included fatigue (4.5% vs 4.8%), nausea (4.5% vs 0%) and diarrhea (4.5% vs 0%) in two groups. Conclusion Anlotinib plus irinotecan was similarly tolerable but prolonged PFS compared to irinotecan monotherapy as a second-line treatment in patients with recurrent ESCC.

scholarly journals Camrelizumab Plus Apatinib in Patients With Advanced Cervical Cancer (CLAP): A Multicenter, Open-Label, Single-Arm, Phase II Trial

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (34) ◽  
pp. 4095-4106
Author(s):  
Chunyan Lan ◽  
Jingxian Shen ◽  
Yin Wang ◽  
Jundong Li ◽  
Zhimin Liu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Kinase Inhibitor ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Growth Factor Receptor ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Advanced Cervical Cancer ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Duration Of Response ◽  
Grade 3

PURPOSE Camrelizumab is an antibody against programmed death protein 1. We assessed the activity and safety of camrelizumab plus apatinib, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2, in patients with advanced cervical cancer. METHODS This multicenter, open-label, single-arm, phase II study enrolled patients with advanced cervical cancer who progressed after at least one line of systemic therapy. Patients received camrelizumab 200 mg every 2 weeks and apatinib 250 mg once per day. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR) assessed by investigators per RECIST version 1.1. Key secondary end points were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), duration of response, and safety. RESULTS Forty-five patients were enrolled and received treatment. Median age was 51.0 years (range, 33-67 years), and 57.8% of patients had previously received two or more lines of chemotherapy for recurrent or metastatic disease. Ten patients (22.2%) had received bevacizumab. Median follow-up was 11.3 months (range, 1.0-15.5 months). ORR was 55.6% (95% CI, 40.0% to 70.4%), with two complete and 23 partial responses. Median PFS was 8.8 months (95% CI, 5.6 months to not estimable). Median duration of response and median OS were not reached. Treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events (AEs) occurred in 71.1% of patients, and the most common AEs were hypertension (24.4%), anemia (20.0%), and fatigue (15.6%). The most common potential immune-related AEs included grade 1-2 hypothyroidism (22.2%) and reactive cutaneous capillary endothelial proliferation (8.9%). CONCLUSION Camrelizumab plus apatinib had promising antitumor activity and manageable toxicities in patients with advanced cervical cancer. Larger randomized controlled trials are warranted to validate our findings.

A phase II trial of pemetrexed (P), gemcitabine (G), and bevacizumab (BV) in untreated patients (pts) with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e19099-e19099
Author(s):  
A. J. Wozniak ◽  
G. P. Kalemkerian ◽  
S. M. Gadgeel ◽  
B. J. Schneider ◽  
M. Valdivieso ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase Ii ◽  
Phase Ii Trial ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Major Surgery ◽  
Major Vessel ◽  
Close Proximity ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Improvement In Survival

e19099 Background: P and G are active agents with acceptable toxicity profiles in the treatment of NSCLC. The addition of BV to chemotherapy has resulted in a significant improvement in survival for pts with non-squamous NSCLC. We are currently conducting a phase II trial of P, G and BV on a novel every two week schedule in untreated pts with advanced NSCLC. Methods: Advanced, non-squamous NSCLC pts with measurable/evaluable disease, no prior treatment for advanced disease, PS 0–1, adequate hepatic, renal and bone marrow function, treated brain metastases were eligible. No unstable hypertension/cardiac disease/vascular disease, hemoptysis, anti-coagulation, recent major surgery, no cavitation or close proximity of primary cancer to a major vessel were allowed. Pts received P 500 mg/m2, G 1,500 mg/m2, and BV 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks for 12 cycles. Doses were reduced to P 400 mg/m2 and G 1,200 mg/m2 when grade 4 neutropenia occurred in the first 2 patients. BV was continued until disease progression or toxicity. Planned accrual is 42 patients. Primary endpoint is progression-free survival. Secondary endpoints are response rate (RR), toxicity, time to progression and overall survival. Results: 20 pts have been accrued. Median age 57.5 yrs, males-55%, stage IV 90%, adenocarcinoma 75%. 18 pts are response evaluable (2 were too early to assess). 11/18 (61%) pts had a response (1 CR, 7 PR, 3 unconfirmed PR) (90% CI for RR is 0.42 - 0.77), and 3 had SD ( 17%) for a disease control rate of 78%. Currently the median treatment cycles for all pts are 6 (range 1–12). All pts are evaluable for toxicity. Grade 3- 4 toxicities: neutropenia 4, anemia 1, thrombocytopenia 2, lymphopenia 1, febrile neutropenia 1, fatigue 4, hypertension 1, GI 2, ALT/AST 3, pneumonitis 1, muscular weakness 1, metabolic 2, otitis media 1. Conclusions: The combination of P, G, and BV is a very active and tolerable treatment for NSCLC despite the preliminary nature of these results. Updated information will be presented at the meeting. This research is supported by Lilly Oncology and Genentech. [Table: see text]

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document