Atezolizumab (atezo) monotherapy versus chemotherapy in previously untreated locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC): Clinical outcomes by PD-L1 status in cisplatin (cis)-ineligible pts from the phase III IMvigor130 study.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 434-434
Author(s):  
Matt D. Galsky ◽  
Aristotelis Bamias ◽  
Jose Angel Arranz Arija ◽  
Ian D. Davis ◽  
Maria De Santis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Single Agent ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Exploratory Analysis ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Primary Analysis ◽  
Fixed Sequence ◽  
Safety Population ◽  
Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
In Cis

434 Background: Atezo (anti–PD-L1) monotherapy is approved for cis-ineligible pts who have locally advanced or mUC with PD-L1–expressing immune cells on ≥ 5% of the tumor area (IC2/3 per VENTANA SP142 IHC assay). The IMvigor130 primary analysis demonstrated a significant PFS benefit with atezo + platinum/gemcitabine (plt/gem) (arm A) vs placebo (pbo) + plt/gem (arm C) as 1L treatment for mUC (Galsky Lancet 2020); at that time, interim OS data for arm A vs C were encouraging but immature. OS with atezo monotherapy (arm B) could not be formally tested, but favorable efficacy was seen in IC2/3 pts. In this exploratory analysis, we assess outcomes by PD-L1 status in cis-ineligible pts. Methods: Pts were randomized 1:1:1 to arms A, B or C (Galsky Lancet 2020). Evaluation of OS (co-primary EP) was performed via a hierarchical fixed sequence procedure: arm A vs C ITT pts; then, arm B vs C ITT and IC2/3 pts. No formal testing was performed in this exploratory subgroup analyses; OS and RECIST 1.1 ORR (per investigator [secondary EP]) were descriptively evaluated. Results: Efficacy data suggested OS and ORR benefit in atezo-treated cis-ineligible IC2/3 pts (Table). In the overall safety population, all-grade treatment-related AEs (TRAEs) had occurred in 60% and 96% of arm B and C pts, respectively; grade 3-4 TRAEs occurred in 15% and 81%, respectively. Biomarker data evaluating PD-L1 biology (assessed by SP142) and associated transcriptome analysis in arms B vs C will be presented. Conclusions: This exploratory analysis of IMvigor130 pts with 1L cis–ineligible IC2/3 mUC provides additional evidence for clinical benefit with single-agent atezo, a well-tolerated treatment with a distinct safety profile vs chemo. Analyses with longer OS follow-up are warranted. Clinical trial information: NCT02807636 . Research Sponsor: F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd[Table: see text]

Gemcitabine plus docetaxel versus docetaxel in patients (pts) with HER2-negative locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer (MBC): A randomized phase III study

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1015-1015
Author(s):  
D. L. Nielsen ◽  
S. T. Langkjer ◽  
K. Bjerre ◽  
S. Cold ◽  
L. Stenbygaard ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Hematologic Toxicity ◽  
Phase Iii Study ◽  
Her 2 ◽  
Grade 3

1015 Background: Gemcitabine (G), either as a single agent or in combination with taxanes, has demonstrated efficacy in MBC in phase II and III studies. We conducted a phase III study to compare time to progression (TTP) of G plus docetaxel (T) versus (vs.) T alone. The secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), and toxicity. Methods: Females with HER-2-negative locally advanced or MBC and a WHO performance status ≤ 2 were randomized to GT (G 1,000mg/m2 day 1 + 8; T 75mg/m2 day 1) or T (100mg/m2 day 1) every 21 days. Pts were previously untreated, had prior anthracycline-based (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy or had received a single prior anthracycline-bsed chemotherapy regimen for MBC. Time-to-event endpoints were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and the log-rank test was applied for comparisons between regimens. The planned sample size was 254 evaluable pts with α I and β of 0.05 and 0.90, respectively. Results: A total of 336 pts were randomized (170 GT; 166 T), data from one centre are yet missing and the present evaluation is based on data from 306 pts (155 GT; 151 T). The pts had a median age of 58 years in both regimens; range 36–73 years and 30–74 years, respectively. The median TTP was 7.5 months for the GT regimen vs. 6.5 months for the T regimen. The GT arm demonstrated an ORR of 44% vs. 38% in the T arm with 4 and 3 % complete responses, respectively. The OS was 13.4 vs. 13.2 months in the GT and T arm, respectively. Hematologic toxicity was common, especially grade 3–4 neutropenia (GT = 69%; T = 61%); infection was reported in 22 and 20% of the pts, respectively (none of the pts received G-CSF). The most commonly reported non-hematologic toxicities of grade 3–4 included mucositis (GT = 2%; T = 5%), diarrhea (GT = 4%; T = 7 %), fatigue (GT = 6%; T = 11%), oedema (GT = 10%; T = 3%), and peripheral neuropathy (GT = 9%; T = 28%). Conclusions: Preliminary data of GT as first- or second-line chemotherapy demonstrates a TTP advantage among HER-2-negative pts with advanced breast cancer. Updated results and proper statistical analyses will be presented. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Prospective randomised phase II trial of oral vinorelbine (NVBo) and cisplatin (P) or pemetrexed (Pem) and P in first-line metastatic or locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (M or LA NSCLC) with nonsquamous (Non SCC) histological type. NAVoTRIAL01: Final results.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 8043-8043
Author(s):  
Jaafar Bennouna ◽  
Libor Havel ◽  
Maciej Krzakowski ◽  
Jens Kollmeier ◽  
Radj Gervais ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Smoking Status ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Histological Type ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Front Line ◽  
Oral Vinorelbine ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Set Up ◽  
Line Chemotherapy

8043 Background: NVBo+P is considered as a standard treatment in M or LA NSCLC. The recent approval of Pem+P as front line chemotherapy (CT) for non SCC demonstrates that today, histology could become a “new guidance” to treat patients (pts). The importance of histological types was highlighted in a phase III trial (Scagliotti. JCO 2008). Moreover, the higher chemosensitivity of non SCC is recognised and reported with other chemotherapies (Ardizzoni. JNCI 2007). In GLOB 3 study, NVBo+P also showed better survival in adenocarcinoma (11.7m) than in SCC (8.9m) (Tan. Ann Oncol. 2009). This trial was set up to assess the efficacy of NVBo+P (Arm A) and Pem+P (Arm B) for pts with Non SCC histological type, evaluated in terms of Disease Control Rate (DCR) (SD+PR+CR). Methods: Pts were randomised to receive q3w NVBo 80 mg/m² D1D8 (60 at Cycle 1) + P 80 mg/m² D1 (Arm A) or Pem 500 mg/m² + P 75 mg/m² D1 (Arm B). After 4 cycles of combination, pts with DCR received single agent NVBo (Arm A) or PEM (Arm B) as maintenance until progression or toxicity. Pts were randomised on a 2/1 basis and stratified according to stage (IIIB - IV - relapse), non SCC confirmed by histology or cytology, gender, smoking status and centre. Results: From 11/09 to 02/11, 153 pts were randomised to Arm A (102 pts) or Arm B (51 pts). DCR after combination and maintenance was 75.0% (95% CI, 65.3 to 83.1) in Arm A and 76.5% (95% CI, 62.5 to 87.2) in Arm B. Median PFS was 4.2 (95% CI, 3.6 to 4.7) and 4.3 months (95% CI, 3.8 to 5.6) in Arm A and Arm B, respectively. Median OS was 10.2 months (95% CI, 7.8 to 11.9) and 10.8 months (95% CI, 7.0 to16.4) in Arm A and Arm B, respectively. During the combination period grade 3/4 neutropenia was 44.0% in Arm A and 18.3% in Arm B but febrile neutropenia was 2% in both arms; grade 3/4 thrombopenia was 0% and 6% in Arm A and Arm B, respectively. Conclusions: Even if the current results should be confirmed in a phase III study, the choice of a platinum-based doublet with oral vinorelbine as front-line chemotherapy could be a useful alternative in non SCC. Clinical trial information: 2009-012001-19.

Phase III, randomized study of first-line trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) ± pertuzumab (P) vs. trastuzumab + taxane (HT) treatment of HER2-positive MBC: Final overall survival (OS) and safety from MARIANNE.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1003-1003 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edith A. Perez ◽  
Carlos H. Barrios ◽  
Wolfgang Eiermann ◽  
Masakazu Toi ◽  
Young-Hyuck Im ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Advanced Breast Cancer ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Advanced Breast ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
First Line ◽  
Primary Analysis ◽  
Her2 Positive ◽  
Grade 3

1003 Background: In MARIANNE (NCT01120184), patients with HER2-positive advanced breast cancer were randomized to trastuzumab + docetaxel or paclitaxel (HT; n=365), T-DM1 + placebo (T-DM1; n=367), or T-DM1 + P (T-DM1 + P; n=363) as first-line therapy. In the primary analysis, T-DM1–based treatment exhibited noninferior, but not superior, progression-free survival relative to HT (Perez EA, et al. J Clin Oncol 2016). OS was similar between treatments in the first interim analysis. Here we report OS from the final descriptive analysis. Methods: Enrolled patients had centrally assessed HER2-positive (IHC3+ or ISH+) progressive/recurrent locally advanced breast cancer or previously untreated MBC with a ≥6-month interval since (neo)adjuvant treatment with taxanes or vinca alkaloids. Results: At the clinical cutoff date of May 15, 2016, median follow-up was 54 months and 512 patients had died. Median OS was 50.9, 53.7, and 51.8 months with HT, T-DM1, and T-DM1 + P, respectively (Table). A sensitivity analysis in which HT-treated patients who received T-DM1 and/or P after disease progression (n=85) were censored prior to treatment switch found similar results. There were numerically fewer grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) with T-DM1. Conclusions: With this longer follow-up, the T-DM1 safety profile was consistent with the primary analysis and prior experience. While OS was similar across treatment arms, a median OS of 53.7 months and fewer grade ≥3 AEs (vs other arms) supports T-DM1 as an effective and tolerable alternative first-line treatment for HER2-positive MBC patients. Clinical trial information: NCT01120184. [Table: see text]

Phase III study of taselisib (GDC-0032) + fulvestrant (FULV) v FULV in patients (pts) with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive, PIK3CA-mutant (MUT), locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer (MBC): Primary analysis from SANDPIPER.

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. LBA1006-LBA1006 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jose Baselga ◽  
Susan Faye Dent ◽  
Javier Cortés ◽  
Young-Hyuck Im ◽  
Véronique Diéras ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Single Agent ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Pik3ca Mutation ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Primary Analysis ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Er Positive ◽  
Phase Iii Study

LBA1006 Background: Taselisib, a potent, selective PI3K inhibitor, has enhanced activity in PIK3CA-MUT BC cell lines and confirmed partial responses in PIK3CA-MUT BC as a single-agent or with FULV. We assessed taselisib + FULV in pts with ER-positive, HER2-negative, PIK3CA-MUT locally advanced or MBC. Methods: SANDPIPER (NCT02340221) is a double-blind, placebo (PBO)-controlled, randomized, phase III study. Postmenopausal pts with disease recurrence or progression during or after an aromatase inhibitor were randomized 2:1 to receive taselisib (4 mg oral, qd) or PBO + FULV (500 mg). Stratification factors were: visceral disease, endocrine sensitivity, and geographic region. Pts with PIK3CA-MUT tumors, assessed by central cobas PIK3CA Mutation Test, were randomized separately from non-MUT tumors. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (INV-PFS) in pts with PIK3CA-MUT tumors. Secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), clinical benefit rate (CBR), duration of objective response (DoR), PFS by blinded independent central review (BICR-PFS), and safety. Results: 516 pts were randomized in the PIK3CA-MUT intention-to-treat (ITT) population. Efficacy is shown in the Table. Taselisib + FULV significantly improved INV-PFS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.70) as confirmed by BICR-PFS (HR 0.66). OS is immature. The most common grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs; preferred terms) in the taselisib + FULV arm in safety-evaluable pts who received ≥ 1 dose of treatment were diarrhea (12%), hyperglycemia (10%), colitis (3%), and stomatitis (2%). AEs led to more taselisib discontinuations (17% v 2%) and dose reductions (37% v 2%), v PBO. Conclusions: Taselisib + FULV significantly improved INV-PFS, v PBO + FULV, in pts with ER-positive, HER2-negative, PIK3CA-MUT locally advanced or MBC. The safety profile is largely consistent with previous studies. Clinical trial information: NCT02340221. [Table: see text]

Updated results of European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) phase 2 trial 1202 cabazitaxel in patients with metastatic or inoperable locally advanced dedifferentiated liposarcoma.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 11518-11518
Author(s):  
Roberta Sanfilippo ◽  
Richard L Hayward ◽  
Jammbe Musoro ◽  
Charlotte Benson ◽  
Michael Gordon Leahy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Dedifferentiated Liposarcoma ◽  
Study Endpoint ◽  
Primary Study ◽  
Primary Analysis ◽  
European Organization ◽  
Experimental Drugs

11518 Background: Treatment options for patients with unresectable and/or metastatic dedifferentiated liposarcoma (DDLPS) are limited. The most effective agents include doxorubicin, ifosfamide, trabectedin and eribulin, but, in general, objective response rates (ORR) and progression free survival (PFS) are modest. Cabazitaxel exerts its effect through inhibition of microtubular disassembly and has been shown to be relatively safe, effective and well-tolerated. EORTC 1202 assessed whether cabazitaxel demonstrated sufficient antitumor activity in patients with metastatic or inoperable locally advanced DD LPS to justify further investigation in a phase III setting. Methods: This was an international multi-center, open label single arm phase II trial. The clinical cut-off date for the primary analysis was performed on August 31, 2020. Data base lock was performed on February 2, 2021. Eligible patients with metastatic or inoperable locally advanced DD LPS, after a centralized pathological review, were treated with cabazitaxel 25mg/m² IV infusion over 1 hour every 21 days. Primary endpoint was PFS rate at 12 weeks assessed by local investigator per RECIST 1.1. Based on a Simon two-stage design, at least 4 out of 17 (Stage 1) and 11 out of 37 (Stage 2) eligible and evaluable patients who are progression-free at 12 weeks were needed. Currently, a centralized radiological assessment is ongoing. Results: Forty patients were registered by 10 institutions in 4 countries between March 2015 and March 2019, with 2 patients being ineligible. One patient was still on treatment at the clinical cut-off date. The number of cycles ranged from 1 to 30, with a median of 5; 26 patients (65%) received at least 4 cycles of cabazitaxel. PFS at 12 weeks was 55% (conditional 1-sided 95% CI 40.8-100), achieving the primary study endpoint. The median FU was 21.6 months, median PFS was 6 months and median OS 21 months. RR was 8% with one CR and two PR. Twenty-three(60.5%) pts had a SD. Disease control (PR+SD) was achieved in 26 patients (68%). The most common cabazitaxel -related grade >3 adverse events in all 40 registered patients were Neutrophil count decreased (50%), febrile neutropenia (25%), fatigue (12.5%), and anemia (10%). There were no cabazitaxel-related deaths. Conclusions: EORTC 1202 met its primary endpoint, with 21/38 pts (55%) being progression-free at 12 weeks. Results of this trial confirm activity of cabazitaxel in patients with metastatic or inoperable locally advanced DD LPS and looks interesting if compared to the other available options and experimental drugs recently reported in this patient population. Clinical trial information: NCT01913652.

TROPiCS-04: Study of sacituzumab govitecan in metastatic or locally advanced unresectable urothelial cancer that has progressed after platinum and checkpoint inhibitor therapy.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS498-TPS498
Author(s):  
Petros Grivas ◽  
Scott T. Tagawa ◽  
Joaquim Bellmunt ◽  
Maria De Santis ◽  
Ignacio Duran ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Benefit ◽  
Topoisomerase I ◽  
Progressive Disease ◽  
Group Performance ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitor ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group ◽  
Phase Iii

TPS498 Background: Treatment options are limited for patients with locally advanced unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) who progress following prior platinum-based and checkpoint inhibitor (CPI) therapy. Sacituzumab govitecan (SG) is an antibody-drug conjugate consisting of an anti–Trop-2 monoclonal antibody coupled to SN-38 (an active metabolite of irinotecan, a topoisomerase-I inhibitor) via a unique hydrolyzable linker. A phase II registrational study, TROPHY-U-01 study, confirmed the initial positive efficacy signal in mUC. SG demonstrated an objective response rate (ORR) of 27% and median overall survival (OS) of 10.5 months in patients with mUC (median 3 prior lines of therapy and 87% with ≥1 Bellmunt risk factors) who progressed after prior platinum-based and CPI therapies (n=113; Loriot ESMO 2020). The results compared favorably with historic single-agent chemotherapy (ORR ~10%; OS ≤7 months). A phase III trial has been initiated to confirm these findings. Methods: TROPiCS-04 (NCT04527991) is a global, multicenter, open-label, randomized, controlled trial in patients with locally advanced unresectable or mUC who progressed after prior platinum-based and CPI therapies (with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0–1 and adequate hematologic, hepatic, and renal function). Patients will be randomized 1:1 to receive SG 10 mg/kg intravenously (IV) on day 1 and 8 of 21-day cycles or single-agent treatment of physician’s choice (paclitaxel 175 mg/m2, docetaxel 75 mg/m2, or vinflunine 320 mg/m2 IV on day 1 of 21-day cycles) until progressive disease, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal of consent. Treatment beyond progressive disease may be permitted in patients deemed to be receiving clinical benefit per investigator assessment. Approximately 482 patients will be enrolled to provide 90% power on the primary endpoint of OS. Secondary endpoints include progression-free survival, ORR, clinical benefit rate, duration of response (all per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors v1.1), safety, and quality of life. Study initiation is ongoing and enrollment begins in Q4 2020 across ~90 sites. Clinical trial information: NCT04527991.

Phase I Trial of Escalating-Dose Irinotecan Given Weekly With Cisplatin and Concurrent Radiotherapy in Locally Advanced Esophageal Cancer

2003 ◽  
Vol 21 (15) ◽  
pp. 2926-2932 ◽  
Author(s):  
David H. Ilson ◽  
Manjit Bains ◽  
David P. Kelsen ◽  
Eileen O’Reilly ◽  
Martin Karpeh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Esophageal Cancer ◽  
Phase I ◽  
Induction Chemotherapy ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Phase I Trial ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Concurrent Radiotherapy ◽  
Minimal Toxicity ◽  
Grade 3

Purpose: To identify the maximum-tolerated dose and dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) of weekly irinotecan combined with cisplatin and radiation in esophageal cancer. Patients and Methods: Nineteen patients with clinical stage II to III esophageal squamous cell or adenocarcinoma were treated on this phase I trial. Induction chemotherapy with weekly cisplatin 30 mg/m2 and irinotecan 65 mg/m2 was administered for four treatments during weeks 1 to 5. Radiotherapy was delivered weeks 8 to 13 in 1.8-Gy daily fractions to a dose of 50.4 Gy. Cisplatin 30 mg/m2 and escalating-dose irinotecan (40, 50, 65, and 80 mg/m2) were administered on days 1, 8, 22, and 29 of radiotherapy. DLT was defined as a 2-week delay in radiotherapy for grade 3 to 4 toxicity. Results: Minimal toxicity was observed during chemoradiotherapy, with no grade 3 or 4 esophagitis, diarrhea, or stomatitis. DLT caused by myelosuppression was seen in two of six patients treated at the 80-mg/m2 dose level, thus irinotecan 65 mg/m2 was defined as the recommended phase II dose. Dysphagia improved or resolved after induction chemotherapy in 13 (81%) of 16 patients who reported dysphagia before therapy. Only one patient (5%) required a feeding tube. Six complete responses (32%) were observed, including four pathologic complete responses in 15 patients selected to undergo surgery (27%). Conclusion: Cisplatin, irinotecan, and concurrent radiotherapy can be administered on a convenient schedule with relatively minimal toxicity and an acceptable rate of complete response in esophageal cancer. Further phase II evaluation of this regimen is ongoing. A phase III comparison to fluorouracil or taxane-containing chemoradiotherapy should be considered.

Oxaliplatin Plus Irinotecan Compared With Irinotecan Alone as Second-Line Treatment After Single-Agent Fluoropyrimidine Therapy for Metastatic Colorectal Carcinoma

2008 ◽  
Vol 26 (28) ◽  
pp. 4544-4550 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel G. Haller ◽  
Mace L. Rothenberg ◽  
Alfred O. Wong ◽  
Piotr M. Koralewski ◽  
Wilson H. Miller ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Median Overall Survival ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Sensory Disturbances ◽  
Previously Treated ◽  
Grade 3

Purpose To determine whether irinotecan plus oxaliplatin (IROX) is superior to irinotecan alone in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) previously treated with single-agent fluoropyrimidines. Patients and Methods A phase III, randomized, open-label, multicenter study of patients with metastatic or recurrent CRC that had progressed or recurred during or after adjuvant or first-line fluoropyrimidines (fluorouracil/leucovorin or capecitabine, the latter only for metastatic CRC). Patients received IROX (irinotecan 200 mg/m2 plus oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2) or irinotecan alone (350 mg/m2) every 3 weeks. Results At the data cutoff (when 447 of 628 randomly assigned patients had died), median overall survival was 13.4 months (95% CI, 12.4 to 14.7 months) and 11.1 month (95% CI, 10.0 to 12.7 months) in the IROX and irinotecan groups, respectively (hazard ratio = 0.78; 95% CI, 0.65 to 0.94; P = .0072). Overall response rate (22% v 7%, respectively; P < .0001), median time to progression (5.3 v 2.8 months, respectively; P < .0001), and improvement in tumor-related symptoms (32% v 19%, respectively; P = .0072) were also improved with IROX as compared with irinotecan. With the exception of granulocytopenia (25% v 13%), diarrhea (28% v 23%), and sensory disturbances (5% v 0%), grade 3 to 4 toxicities were comparable between the IROX and irinotecan groups, respectively. Conclusion IROX is an effective treatment for metastatic CRC that has progressed after first-line fluoropyrimidine therapy. IROX improves efficacy compared with irinotecan alone, providing an additional option in the postadjuvant or second-line treatment setting for patients who experience treatment failure with single-agent fluoropyrimidine therapy.

Gemcitabine Plus Capecitabine Compared With Gemcitabine Alone in Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: A Randomized, Multicenter, Phase III Trial of the Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research and the Central European Cooperative Oncology Group

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (16) ◽  
pp. 2212-2217 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Herrmann ◽  
György Bodoky ◽  
Thomas Ruhstaller ◽  
Bengt Glimelius ◽  
Emilio Bajetta ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Karnofsky Performance Score ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
Good Performance Status ◽  
Grade 3

PurposeThis phase III trial compared the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine (Gem) plus capecitabine (GemCap) versus single-agent Gem in advanced/metastatic pancreatic cancer.Patients and MethodsPatients were randomly assigned to receive GemCap (oral capecitabine 650 mg/m2twice daily on days 1 to 14 plus Gem 1,000 mg/m2by 30-minute infusion on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks) or Gem (1,000 mg/m2by 30-minute infusion weekly for 7 weeks, followed by a 1-week break, and then weekly for 3 weeks every 4 weeks). Patients were stratified according to center, Karnofsky performance score (KPS), presence of pain, and disease extent.ResultsA total of 319 patients were enrolled between June 2001 and June 2004. Median overall survival (OS) time, the primary end point, was 8.4 and 7.2 months in the GemCap and Gem arms, respectively (P = .234). Post hoc analysis in patients with good KPS (score of 90 to 100) showed a significant prolongation of median OS time in the GemCap arm compared with the Gem arm (10.1 v 7.4 months, respectively; P = .014). The overall frequency of grade 3 or 4 adverse events was similar in each arm. Neutropenia was the most frequent grade 3 or 4 adverse event in both arms.ConclusionGemCap failed to improve OS at a statistically significant level compared with standard Gem treatment. The safety of GemCap and Gem was similar. In the subgroup of patients with good performance status, median OS was improved significantly. GemCap is a practical regimen that may be considered as an alternative to single-agent Gem for the treatment of advanced/metastatic pancreatic cancer patients with a good performance status.

Olaparib maintenance monotherapy for non-germline BRCA1/2-mutated (non-gBRCAm) platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer (PSR OC) patients (pts): Phase IIIb OPINION primary analysis.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 5545-5545
Author(s):  
Andres Poveda ◽  
Stephanie Lheureux ◽  
Nicoletta Colombo ◽  
David Cibula ◽  
Kristina Lindemann ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Brca Mutation ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Subsequent Treatment ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Primary Analysis ◽  
Platinum Sensitive ◽  
Platinum Based Chemotherapy ◽  
Phase Iiib ◽  
Grade 3

5545 Background: In the Phase II Study 19 trial (NCT00753545; Ledermann et al Lancet Oncol 2014), maintenance olaparib improved progression-free survival (PFS) vs placebo in PSR OC pts, including non-BRCAm pts. A significant PFS benefit was also seen with maintenance olaparib vs placebo in gBRCAm PSR OC pts in the Phase III SOLO2 trial (NCT01874353; Pujade-Lauraine et al Lancet Oncol 2017). To investigate olaparib maintenance monotherapy in non-gBRCAm PSR OC pts who had received ≥2 prior lines of platinum-based chemotherapy (PBC), we performed the Phase IIIb, single-arm, OPINION study (NCT03402841). Methods: Pts had high-grade serous or endometrioid OC and were in complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) to PBC. Pts received maintenance olaparib (tablets; 300 mg bid) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed PFS (modified RECIST v1.1). Secondary endpoints included PFS by homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) and somatic BRCA mutation (sBRCAm) status determined by central Myriad tumor and germline testing; and time to first subsequent treatment (TFST). The primary analysis was planned for 18 months (mo) after the last patient was enrolled. Results: 279 pts were enrolled from 17 countries (mean age: 64 years); 253 pts (90.7%) were confirmed non-gBRCAm. At data cut-off (Oct 2, 2020), median PFS was 9.2 mo (95% CI 7.6–10.9), with 210 PFS events (75.3% maturity). 65.3%, 38.5% and 24.3% of pts were progression-free (PF) at 6, 12 and 18 mo, respectively. The Table shows PFS in key subgroups. Median TFST was 13.9 mo (95% CI 11.5–16.4). Median exposure to olaparib was 9.4 mo (range 0.0–31.9). Grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in 29.0% of pts and serious TEAEs in 19.7% of pts. TEAEs led to dose interruption, dose reduction and treatment discontinuation in 47.0%, 22.6% and 7.5% of pts, respectively. Conclusions: Our findings support the use of olaparib maintenance therapy in non-gBRCAm PSR OC pts, consistent with our interim analysis and previous trials in this setting. Clinical trial information: NCT03402841. [Table: see text]

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document