scholarly journals Safety and tolerability of sorafenib in patients with radioiodine-refractory thyroid cancer

2015 ◽  
Vol 22 (6) ◽  
pp. 877-887 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francis Worden ◽  
Martin Fassnacht ◽  
Yuankai Shi ◽  
Tatiana Hadjieva ◽  
Françoise Bonichon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Weight Loss ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Differentiated Thyroid Carcinoma ◽  
Thyroid Stimulating Hormone ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Decision Trial ◽  
Concomitant Medications ◽  
To Receive ◽  
Over Time

Effective adverse event (AE) management is critical to maintaining patients on anticancer therapies. The DECISION trial was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, Phase 3 trial which investigated sorafenib for treatment of progressive, advanced, or metastatic radioactive iodine-refractory, differentiated thyroid carcinoma. Four hundred and seventeen adult patients were randomized (1:1) to receive oral sorafenib (400 mg, twice daily) or placebo, until progression, unacceptable toxicity, noncompliance, or withdrawal. Progression-free survival, the primary endpoint of DECISION, was reported previously. To elucidate the patterns and management of AEs in sorafenib-treated patients in the DECISION trial, this report describes detailed, by-treatment-cycle analyses of the incidence, prevalence, and severity of hand–foot skin reaction (HFSR), rash/desquamation, hypertension, diarrhea, fatigue, weight loss, increased serum thyroid stimulating hormone, and hypocalcemia, as well as the interventions used to manage these AEs. By-cycle incidence of the above-selected AEs with sorafenib was generally highest in cycle 1 or 2 then decreased. AE prevalence generally increased over cycles 2–6 then stabilized or declined. Among these AEs, only weight loss tended to increase in severity (from grade 1 to 2) over time; severity of HFSR and rash/desquamation declined over time. AEs were mostly grade 1 or 2, and were generally managed with dose interruptions/reductions, and concomitant medications (e.g. antidiarrheals, antihypertensives, dermatologic preparations). Most dose interruptions/reductions occurred in early cycles. In conclusion, AEs with sorafenib in DECISION were typically grade 1 or 2, occurred early during the treatment course, and were manageable over time.

A randomized double-blind trial of carboplatin plus paclitaxel (CP) with daily oral cediranib (CED), an inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptors, or placebo (PLA) in patients (pts) with previously untreated advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC):  NCIC Clinical Trials Group study BR29.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 7511-7511 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott Andrew Laurie ◽  
Benjamin J. Solomon ◽  
Lesley Seymour ◽  
Peter Michael Ellis ◽  
Glenwood D. Goss ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Response Rate ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Vascular Endothelial ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Endothelial Growth Factor ◽  
To Receive ◽  
Unacceptable Toxicity

7511 Background: In NCIC CTG study BR24, CED 30 mg/d + CP increased objective response rate (RR) and progression-free survival (PFS), but there were concerns regarding toxicity in some pts. BR29 tested a lower dose of CED 20 mg/d limiting accrual to pts without significant weight loss/hypoalbuminemia. Methods: Consenting, eligible adult pts with advanced incurable NSCLC of any histology were randomized to receive CED 20 mg/d or PLA with up to 6 cycles of C (AUC = 6) P (200 mg/m2); non-progressing pts continued CED/PLA after CP until progression, unacceptable toxicity or pt request. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). An interim analysis (IA) for PFS was planned after 170 events in the first 260 pts; the study would continue if the hazard ratio (HR) for PFS was < 0.7. Accrual continued until the required number of events was reached then held pending IA. Results: The trial was halted when the IA (n=260) revealed a HR for PFS of 0.89 (95% CI 0.66-1.20). A final analysis including all 306 randomized pts (median age 62, male 55%, PS 0 26%, PS 1 74%, adenocarcinoma 64%, squamous 13%, other histology 23%. RR was significantly higher with CED (52% vs 34 %, p = 0.001). For CED/PLA, respectively, median OS and PFS were 12.2/12.1 [HR: 0.95 (0.69-1.30, p=0.74)] and 5.5/5.5 months [HR: 0.91 (0.71-1.18, p=0.5)]. Grade >3 hypertension (15% vs 3%, p=0.0002), anorexia (7% vs 1%, p=0.02) and diarrhea (16% vs 1%, p<0.0001) were all significantly increased with CED; there were 2 deaths possibly-related to CED [1 each hemorrhage, leukoencephalopathy (prior radiation)]. Conclusions: Adding a lower dose of CED to CP increased RR and toxicity, but not PFS or OS.

Final results of the AIO 0307 study: A controlled, randomized, double-blind phase II study of FOLFOX6 or FOLFIRI combined with sorafenib (S) versus placebo (P) in second-line metastatic colorectal carcinoma (mCRC) treatment.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 3586-3586
Author(s):  
Thomas Hoehler ◽  
Thomas Decker ◽  
Christoph Schimanski ◽  
Stephan H. Schmitz ◽  
Stephan Kanzler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sensory Neuropathy ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Multikinase Inhibitor ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Best Response ◽  
Full Analysis ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
To Receive

3586 Background: The oral multikinase inhibitor Sorafenib (S) inhibits angiogenesis and tumor growth in preclinical models of CRC. This study investigated the addition of S to standard 2nd line chemotherapy (CTX). Methods: Patients (pts) with mCRC and progression after first-line therapy with an oxaliplatin- or irinotecan based fluoropyrimidine containing regimen ± Bevacizumab (Bev), were randomized to receive chemotherapy (CTX) (FOLFOX6 or FOLFIRI) + S (400 mg bid) or CTX + placebo (P). 240 pts were planned to be enrolled to ensure a power of 80% if median progression-free survival (PFS) with S is increased by 2 months compared to P. Results: Between 04/09 and 10/11, 101 pts were enrolled. Recruitment was stopped prematurely due to slow accrual. 97 pts were evaluable in the full analysis set. Median age was 65 years, 60 pts were male, 97% with ECOG 0 or 1. Median PFS was 5.2 months (mths) in S and 5.6 mths in P (HR 0.84, 90% CI 0.58, 1.22, p=0.439). Best response rate was 25.6% and 12.2% (p=0.106), respectively. Disease control rates were comparable. Median overall survival (OS) was 9.6 mths with S compared to 12.7 mths with P (HR 1.57, 90% CI 1.03, 2.41, p = 0.076). Difference in OS was even more pronounced in subgroup (n=41) with FOLFOX6 backbone (9.6 vs. 13.8 mths, HR 2.37, 90% CI 1.22, 4.60, p=0.026). In 69 Bev-pretreated pts OS was 8.4 vs. 14.9 mths (HR 2.30; 90% CI 1.36, 3.88, p=0.007) compared to 13.1 vs. 7.4 mths (HR=0.61; 90% CI 0.28, 1.36, p=0.308) in 28 pts without Bev pretreatment. Adverse events (AEs) were consistent with the known safety profiles. Most frequent grade 3/4 AEs affected the gastrointestinal tract (diarrhea, mucositis/stomatitis, nausea); other frequent severe AEs included neutropenia and leukopenia, fatigue, fever, sensory neuropathy, and thrombosis. Conclusions: No unexpected safety concerns occurred during the course of the study. S did not lead to improved PFS. There was a detrimental effect of S on OS in patients with Bev pretreatment. Clinical trial information: 2008-000803-26.

scholarly journals Treating the patient and not just the cancer: therapeutic burden in prostate cancer

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel E. Spratt ◽  
Neal Shore ◽  
Oliver Sartor ◽  
Dana Rathkopf ◽  
Kara Olivier
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Second Generation ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Patient Treatment ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Androgen Ablation ◽  
Therapeutic Benefits ◽  
Age Related ◽  
Concomitant Medications

Abstract Background Prostate cancer (PC) is a leading cause of death in older men. Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is considered the standard-of-care for men with locally advanced disease. However, continuous androgen ablation is associated with acute and long-term adverse effects and most patients will eventually develop castration-resistant PC (CRPC). The recent approval of three, second-generation androgen receptor inhibitors (ARIs), apalutamide, enzalutamide, and darolutamide, has transformed the treatment landscape of PC. Treatment with these second-generation ARIs have produced positive trends in metastasis-free survival, progression-free survival, and overall survival. For patients with non-metastatic CRPC, who are mainly asymptomatic from their disease, maintaining quality of life is a major objective when prescribing therapy. Polypharmacy for age-related comorbidities also is common in this population and may increase the potential for drug–drug interactions (DDIs). Method This review summarizes the multiple factors that may contribute to the therapeutic burden of patients with CRPC, including the interplay between age, comorbidities, concomitant medications, the use of ARIs, and financial distress. Conclusions As the treatment landscape in PC continues to rapidly evolve, consideration must be given to the balance between therapeutic benefits and potential treatment-emergent adverse events that may be further complicated by DDIs with concomitant medications. Patient-centered communication is a crucial aspect of alleviating this burden, and healthcare professionals (HCPs) may benefit from training in effective patient communication. HCPs should closely and frequently monitor patient treatment responses, in order to better understand symptom onset and exacerbation. Patients also should be encouraged to participate in exercise programs, and health information and support groups, which may assist them in preventing or mitigating certain determinants of the therapeutic burden associated with PC and its management.

AMEERA-5: A randomized, double-blind phase III study of amcenestrant (SAR439859) + palbociclib versus letrozole + palbociclib for previously untreated ER+/HER2- advanced breast cancer.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS1104-TPS1104
Author(s):  
Aditya Bardia ◽  
Javier Cortes ◽  
Sara A. Hurvitz ◽  
Suzette Delaloge ◽  
Hiroji Iwata ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Estrogen Receptor ◽  
Phase I ◽  
Advanced Breast Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Advanced Breast ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii Study

TPS1104 Background: Selective estrogen receptor degraders (SERDs) block estrogen receptor (ER) associated signaling and have created interest for treating patients (pts) with advanced ER+ breast cancer (BC). Fulvestrant is currently the only SERD available for advanced BC but requires intramuscular administration, limiting the applied dose, exposure and receptor engagement. Amcenestrant (SAR439859) is an oral SERD that binds with high affinity to both wild-type and mutant ER, blocking estradiol binding and promoting up to 98% ER degradation in preclinical studies. In the phase I AMEERA-1 study of pretreated pts with ER+/HER2- advanced BC, amcenestrant 150–600 mg once daily (QD) showed a mean ER occupancy of 94% with plasma concentrations > 100 ng/mL and a favorable safety profile (Bardia, 2019; data on file). Combination therapy with amcenestrant + palbociclib (palbo) was also evaluated as part of this ongoing phase I study. CDK 4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i) combined with an aromatase inhibitor (AI), the gold standard for first line treatment for advanced breast cancer, prolong progression free survival (PFS) in pts with no prior treatment for ER+/HER2- advanced BC, but OS benefit has not been shown yet in postmenopausal pts. There remains a clinical need for more effective treatments in this setting. Methods: AMEERA-5 (NCT04478266) is an ongoing, prospective, randomized, double-blind phase III study comparing the efficacy and safety of amcenestrant + palbo with that of letrozole + palbo in pts with advanced, locoregional recurrent or metastatic ER+/HER2- BC who have not received prior systemic therapy for advanced disease. The study includes men, pre/peri-menopausal (with goserelin) and post-menopausal women. Pts with progression during or within 12 months of (neo)adjuvant endocrine therapy using any of the following agents are excluded: AI, selective estrogen receptor modulators, CDK4/6i. Pts are randomized 1:1 to either continuous amcenestrant 200 mg or letrozole 2.5 mg QD orally with matching placebos; both combined with palbo 125 mg QD orally (d1–21 every 28-d cycle). Randomization is stratified according to disease type (de novo metastatic vs recurrent disease), the presence of visceral metastasis, and menopausal status. The primary endpoint is investigator assessed progression free survival (PFS) (RECIST v1.1). Secondary endpoints are overall survival, PFS2, objective response rate, duration of response, clinical benefit rate, pharmacokinetics of amcenestrant and palbo, health-related quality of life, time to chemotherapy, and safety. Biomarkers will be measured in paired tumor biopsies and cell free deoxyribonucleic acid (cfDNA) over time. Target enrolment = 1066 pts; enrolment as of 1/2021 = 33 pts. Bardia A, et al., J Clin Oncol. 2019; 37 (15 suppl):1054 Clinical trial information: NCT04478266 .

An Increasing Role for Trabectedin in Gynecological Cancers: Efficacy in Uterine Sarcomas

2011 ◽  
Vol 21 (Supp 1) ◽  
pp. S3-S5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Isabelle Ray-Coquard
Keyword(s):  
Phase Ii ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Uterine Leiomyosarcoma ◽  
Uterine Sarcomas ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Phase Ii Studies ◽  
Prospective Phase ◽  
Pretreated Patients ◽  
To Receive ◽  
A Current

Trabectedin is indicated for patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma after failure of treatment with anthracyclines and ifosfamide or for patients who are unsuited to receive these agents. The agent has shown activity in patients with advanced uterine leiomyosarcoma, with an acceptable safety profile. Thus, the results of phase II studies have shown that treatment with trabectedin results in 30% progression-free survival at 6 months. More than 50% of these pretreated patients were alive at 1 year. The response rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival compared favorably with other single agents (eg, doxorubicin, ifosfamide, and gemcitabine), with clinical benefit in 50% of patients in second-line treatment. These results are being confirmed in a current prospective phase II study in first-line uterine leiomyosarcoma combining trabectedin with doxorubicin.

scholarly journals Efficacy of First-Third generation EGFR inhibitor combined with chemotherapy as first-line treatment for advanced lung adenocarcinoma in a real-world setting

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ming-Wei Chen Ming-Wei Chen ◽  
An-Tai He . ◽  
Yi Pei .
Keyword(s):  
Lung Adenocarcinoma ◽  
Survival Time ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Egfr Mutations ◽  
Combination Group ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Mean Survival Time ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
To Receive

Abstract BackgroundTo explore the optimal treatment strategy for patients who harbor sensitive EGFR mutations, a head-to-head study was performed to compare chemotherapy and gefitinib-erlotinip, osimertinib treatment in combination or with either agent alone as first-line therapy, in terms of efficacy and safety.MethodsA total of 200 untreated patients with advanced lung adenocarcinoma who harbored sensitive EGFR mutations were randomly assigned to receive gefitinib-erlotinip combined with pemetrexed and carboplatin group, gefitinib-erlotinip osimertinib combined with pemetrexed and carboplatin group, pemetrexed plus carboplatin alone group, or gefitinib-erlotinip alone group, osimertinib alone group.ResultsThe progression-free survival (PFS) of patients in the gefitinib-erlotinip combination group Mean Survival Time PFS 22.00 month,95%CI[16.29,27.70] and osimertinib gefitinib-erlotinip combination group Mean Survival Time PFS 40.00 month,95%CI[28.12,51.87]was longer than that of patients in the chemotherapy alone group PFS10,81 months, 95% CI,[ 8.99–12.64],gefitinib-erlotinip alone group PFS14.00 month.95%CI[11.98-20.01], osimertinib alone group PFS 26.66 month 95%CI[24.77-29.22].The gefitinib-erlotinip osimertinib combinational resulted in longer overall survival (OS) than chemotherapy alone (HR = 0.46, p = 0.016) or gefitinib-erlotinip alone (HR = 0.36, p = 0.01). osimertinib alone (HR = 0.26, p = 0.01).ConclusionsOur finding suggested that treatment with pemetrexed plus carboplatin combined with gefitinib-erlotinip and pemetrexed plus carboplatin combined with gefitinib-erlotinip osimertinib group could provide better survival benefits for patients with lung adenocarcinoma harboring sensitive EGFR mutations.

Measurable Residual Disease Does Not Preclude Prolonged Progression-free Survival in CLL Treated with Ibrutinib

Blood ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Victoria Wang ◽  
Curtis A. Hanson ◽  
Renee Tschumper ◽  
Connie Lesnick ◽  
Esteban Braggio ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Treatment Efficacy ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Surrogate Endpoint ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Hazard Ratios ◽  
Additional Support ◽  
Over Time ◽  
Measurable Residual Disease

E1912 was a randomized phase 3 trial comparing indefinite ibrutinib plus six cycles of rituximab (IR) to six cycles of fludarabine, cyclophosphamide and rituximab (FCR) in untreated younger patients with CLL. We describe measurable residual disease (MRD) levels in E1912 over time and correlate them with clinical outcome. Undetectable MRD rates (&lt; 1 CLL cell per 104 leukocytes) were 29.1%, 30.3%, 23.4% and 8.6% at 3, 12, 24 and 36 months for FCR, and significantly lower at 7.9%, 4.2% and 3.7% at 12, 24 and 36 months for IR, respectively. Undetectable MRD at 3, 12, 24 and 36 months was associated with longer progression-free survival (PFS) for the FCR arm with hazard ratios (MRD detectable / MRD undetectable) of 4.29 (95% CI 1.89 - 9.71), 3.91 (95% CI 1.39 - 11.03), 14.12 (95% CI 1.78 - 111.73), and not estimable (no events among those with undetectable MRD), respectively. For the IR arm, patients with detectable MRD did not have significantly worse PFS compared to those in whom MRD was undetectable; however, PFS was longer for those with MRD levels of less than 10-1 compared to those with MRD levels above this threshold. Our observations provide additional support for the use of MRD as a surrogate endpoint for PFS in patients receiving FCR. For patients on indefinite ibrutinib-based therapy, PFS did not differ significantly by undetectable MRD status, while those with MRD less than 10-1 tend to have longer PFS, although continuation of ibrutinib is very likely required to maintain treatment efficacy.

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]

scholarly journals Bevacizumab use in the frontline, maintenance and recurrent settings for ovarian cancer

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (7) ◽  
pp. 225-246 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carolyn E Haunschild ◽  
Krishnansu S Tewari
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Gynecologic Oncology ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Gynecologic Oncology Group ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Platinum Sensitive ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Fda

On 13 June 2018, Genentech, Inc. issued a press release announcing that the US FDA had approved the antiangiogenesis drug, bevacizumab, in combination with chemotherapy for frontline and maintenance therapy for women with newly diagnosed ovarian cancer. Regulatory approval was based on the National Cancer Institute-sponsored Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG) protocol 0218, the Phase III, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, multi-center and multi-national clinical trial that met its primary end point, progression-free survival. Bevacizumab is now approved in the frontline, platinum-sensitive recurrent and platinum-resistant recurrent settings for epithelial ovarian cancer. This review will address the broad range of clinical trials addressing the efficacy of bevacizumab use in ovarian cancer.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document