scholarly journals PD-1 Inhibitors Plus Capecitabine as Maintenance Therapy for Advanced Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma: A Case Report and Review of Literature

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhihong Wang ◽  
Tianmei Zeng ◽  
Yong Li ◽  
Ding Zhang ◽  
Zhengang Yuan ◽  
...  

Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) is the second most common primary liver cancer with a poor prognosis. Recently, an immunotherapy strategy represented by programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) inhibitors has been applied to the systemic treatment of advanced iCCA. However, immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy as first-line maintenance therapy was rarely reported. Our report presented an advanced iCCA patient who had a dramatic response to the PD-1 inhibitor sintilimab combined with gemcitabine plus cisplatin as the first-line therapy and sintilimab combined with capecitabine as maintenance therapy, yielding an ongoing progression-free survival of 16 months.

2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Qiangyun Liu ◽  
Yixuan Zhang ◽  
Miaowen Liu ◽  
Ruoxin Xu ◽  
Fengming Yi ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Although pembrolizumab has shown clinical benefit in patients with small-cell lung cancer (SCLC), its actual efficacy in combination with a conventional chemotherapy drug has not been determined. We performed this study to discern the efficacy and risk of pembrolizumab in combination with chemotherapy as first-line therapy in SCLC patients. Methods We systematically searched the PubMed, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases for relevant studies. The main outcomes were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Results We identified 2980 articles and included 6 studies (5 were noncomparative open-label studies and 1 was a randomized controlled trial [RCT]) involving 396 patients in our meta-analysis. The pooled median OS (mOS) was 9.6 months (95% CI, 8.0-11.2), and the pooled median PFS (mPFS) was 4.2 months (95% CI, 2.2-6.1). The 1-year overall survival rate (OSR-1y) and 6-month progression-free survival rate (PFSR-6m) were 45.1% (95% CI, 33-57.2%) and 41.6% (95% CI, 24.3-59%), respectively. The objective response rate (ORR) was 38.8% (95% CI, 11.9-65.67%), disease control rate (DCR) was 69.30% (95% CI, 51.6-87.0%), complete response (CR) was 2.20% (95% CI, 0.8-3.7%), partial response (PR) was 34.70% (95% CI, 7.8-61.5%), and stable disease (SD) was 20.90% (95% CI, 9.1-32.6%). The grade 3-4 adverse effect (AE) rate was 20.88% (95% CI, 1.22-54.85%). The most common AEs were neutropenia (90.16%), anemia (53.21%), dysphagia (41.96%), platelet count decrease (34.87%), and esophagitis (32.89%); severe AEs included neutropenia, respiratory failure, pneumonitis, acute coronary syndrome, and colitis/intestinal ischemia. Conclusions The combination of pembrolizumab with conventional chemotherapy is an effective therapeutic schedule with acceptable and manageable efficacy and toxicity in patients with SCLC. More high-quality and well-designed RCTs with large sample sizes are warranted to further validate our findings.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ming-Wei Chen Ming-Wei Chen ◽  
An-Tai He . ◽  
Yi Pei .

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.


Author(s):  
Mikifumi Koura ◽  
Masaki Shiota ◽  
Shohei Ueda ◽  
Takashi Matsumoto ◽  
Satoshi Kobayashi ◽  
...  

Abstract Objective This study aimed to reveal the prognostic values of prior local therapy in first-line therapy using androgen receptor-axis targeting agents (abiraterone or enzalutamide) or docetaxel for castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). Methods The study included 303 patients treated with first-line therapy for non-metastatic and metastatic CRPC. The association between prior local therapy and therapeutic outcome including progression-free survival and overall survival was investigated by univariate and multivariate analyses as well as propensity score-matched analysis. Results In univariate analysis, local prior therapy was associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 0.56, 95% confidence interval, 0.40–0.79; P = 0.0009). Overall survival, but not progression-free survival, was better among patients with prior local therapy compared with patients without prior local therapy even after multivariate analysis and propensity score-matched analysis. Conclusions This study robustly indicated that prior local treatment was prognostic for overall survival among patients with CRPC. This finding is useful to predict patient prognosis in CRPC.


BMC Cancer ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hironaga Satake ◽  
Koji Ando ◽  
Eiji Oki ◽  
Mototsugu Shimokawa ◽  
Akitaka Makiyama ◽  
...  

Abstract Background FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab is used as a first-line therapy for patients with unresectable or metastatic colorectal cancer. However, there are no clear recommendations for second-line therapy after FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab combination. Here, we describe our planning for the EFFORT study to investigate whether FOLFIRI plus aflibercept has efficacy following FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab for mCRC. Methods EFFORT is an open-label, multicenter, single arm phase II study to evaluate whether a FOLFIRI plus aflibercept has efficacy following FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab for mCRC. Patients with unresectable or metastatic colorectal cancer who received FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab as a first-line therapy will receive aflibercept and FOLFIRI (aflibercept 4 mg/kg, irinotecan 150 mg/m2 IV over 90 min, with levofolinate 200 mg/m2 IV over 2 h, followed by fluorouracil 400 mg/m2 bolus and fluorouracil 2400 mg/m2 continuous infusion over 46 h) every 2 weeks on day 1 of each cycle. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival (PFS). To achieve 80% power to show a significant response benefit with a one-sided alpha level of 0.10, assuming a threshold progression-free survival of 3 months and an expected value of at least 5.4 months, we estimated that 32 patients are necessary. Secondary endpoints include overall survival, overall response rate, safety, and exploratory biomarker analysis for differentiating anti-VEGF drug in 2nd-line chemotherapy for unresectable or metastatic colorectal cancer. Discussion This is the first study to investigate whether FOLFIRI plus aflibercept has efficacy following FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab for unresectable or metastatic colorectal cancer. Switching to a different type of anti-VEGF drug in second-line therapy after FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab appears to be an attractive treatment strategy when considering survival benefit. It is expected that this phase II study will prove the efficacy of this strategy and that a biomarker for drug selection will be discovered. Trial registration Japan Registry of Clinical Trials jRCTs071190003. Registered April 18, 2019.


2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (30) ◽  
pp. 3374-3382 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andreas du Bois ◽  
Anne Floquet ◽  
Jae-Weon Kim ◽  
Joern Rau ◽  
Josep M. del Campo ◽  
...  

PurposePazopanib is an oral, multikinase inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) -1/-2/-3, platelet-derived growth factor receptor (PDGFR) -α/-β, and c-Kit. Preclinical and clinical studies support VEGFR and PDGFR as targets for advanced ovarian cancer treatment. This study evaluated the role of pazopanib maintenance therapy in patients with ovarian cancer whose disease did not progress during first-line chemotherapy.Patients and MethodsNine hundred forty patients with histologically confirmed cancer of the ovary, fallopian tube, or peritoneum, International Federation Gynecology Obstetrics (FIGO) stages II-IV, no evidence of progression after primary therapy consisting of surgery and at least five cycles of platinum-taxane chemotherapy were randomized 1:1 to receive pazopanib 800 mg once per day or placebo for up to 24 months. The primary end point was progression-free survival by RECIST 1.0 assessed by the investigators.ResultsMaintenance pazopanib prolonged progression-free survival compared with placebo (hazard ratio [HR], 0.77; 95% CI, 0.64 to 0.91; P = .0021; median, 17.9 v 12.3 months, respectively). Interim survival analysis based on events in 35.6% of the population did not show any significant difference. Grade 3 or 4 adverse events of hypertension (30.8%), neutropenia (9.9%), liver-related toxicity (9.4%), diarrhea (8.2%), fatigue (2.7%), thrombocytopenia (2.5%), and palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (1.9%) were significantly higher in the pazopanib arm. Treatment discontinuation related to adverse events was higher among patients treated with pazopanib (33.3%) compared with placebo (5.6%).ConclusionPazopanib maintenance therapy provided a median improvement of 5.6 months (HR, 0.77) in progression-free survival in patients with advanced ovarian cancer who have not progressed after first-line chemotherapy. Overall survival data to this point did not suggest any benefit. Additional analysis should help to identify subgroups of patients in whom improved efficacy may balance toxicity (NCT00866697).


2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (6) ◽  
pp. 312-313
Author(s):  
Wolfgang Schütte ◽  
Miriam Möller

Background: Evidence from retrospective studies suggests that disease progression after first-line chemotherapy for metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) occurs most often at sites of disease known to exist at baseline. However, the potential effect of aggressive local consolidative therapy for patients with oligometastatic NSCLC is unknown. We aimed to assess the effect of local consolidative therapy on progression-free survival. Methods: In this multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 2 study, eligible patients from three hospitals had histological confirmation of stage IV NSCLC, three or fewer metastatic disease lesions after first-line systemic therapy, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 2 or less, had received standard first-line systemic therapy, and had no disease progression before randomisation. First-line therapy was four or more cycles of platinum doublet therapy or 3 or more months of EGFR or ALK inhibitors for patients with EGFR mutations or ALK rearrangements, respectively. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either local consolidative therapy ([chemo]radiotherapy or resection of all lesions) with or without subsequent maintenance treatment or to maintenance treatment alone, which could be observation only. Maintenance treatment was recommended based on a list of approved regimens, and observation was defined as close surveillance without cytotoxic treatment. Randomisation was not masked and was balanced dynamically on five factors: number of metastases, response to initial therapy, CNS metastases, intrathoracic nodal status, and EGFR and ALK status. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival analysed in all patients who were treated and had at least one post-baseline imaging assessment. The study is ongoing but not recruiting participants. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01725165. Findings: Between Nov 28, 2012, and Jan 19, 2016, 74 patients were enrolled either during or at the completion of first-line systemic therapy. The study was terminated early after randomisation of 49 patients (25 in the local consolidative therapy group and 24 in the maintenance treatment group) as part of the annual analyses done by the Data Safety Monitoring Committee of all randomised trials at MD Anderson Cancer Center, and before a planned interim analysis of 44 events. At a median follow-up time for all randomised patients of 12·39 months (IQR 5·52-20·30), the median progression-free survival in the local consolidative therapy group was 11·9 months (90% CI 5·7-20·9) versus 3·9 months (2·3-6·6) in the maintenance treatment group (hazard ratio 0·35 [90% CI 0·18-0·66], log-rank p=0·0054). Adverse events were similar between groups, with no grade 4 adverse events or deaths due to treatment. Grade 3 adverse events in the maintenance therapy group were fatigue (n=1) and anaemia (n=1) and in the local consolidative therapy group were oesophagitis (n=2), anaemia (n=1), pneumothorax (n=1), and abdominal pain (n=1, unlikely related). Interpretation: Local consolidative therapy with or without maintenance therapy for patients with three or fewer metastases from NSCLC that did not progress after initial systemic therapy improved progression-free survival compared with maintenance therapy alone. These findings suggest that aggressive local therapy should be further explored in phase 3 trials as a standard treatment option in this clinical scenario. Funding: MD Anderson Lung Cancer Priority Fund, MD Anderson Cancer Center Moon Shot Initiative, and Cancer Center Support (Core), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health.


2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS4681-TPS4681 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian D. Davis ◽  
Val Gebski ◽  
Mark D. Chatfield ◽  
Peter S. Grimison ◽  
George Kannourakis ◽  
...  

TPS4681 Background: Treatment of RCC has improved due to better understanding of its biology. New targeted therapies have improved time to progression and overall survival but the optimal sequencing of agents is unknown. Currently drugs are given sequentially, usually starting with sunitinib and often followed by an mTOR inhibitor or another VEGFR-targeted therapy, but resistance to both drugs eventually occurs probably due to host adaptive responses. We hypothesize that resistance might be delayed by planned alternation of treatments. Methods: EVERSUN is a single-arm, two-stage, multicenter, phase II clinical trial aiming to determine the activity and safety of an alternating regimen of two therapies with different targets (sunitinib and everolimus) in patients with advanced RCC. Key eligibility criteria: RCC with a clear cell component; metastatic or locally advanced disease not suitable for resection; ECOG performance status 0-1; low or intermediate MSKCC prognostic score. The primary endpoint is the status of being alive and progression-free (RECIST 1.1) 6 months after registration. Target accrual of 55 subjects gives 95% power and 95% confidence to distinguish between 6-month progression free survival rates of 64% or lower vs 84% or higher using a Simon 2-stage minimax design. The criteria for further evaluation come from the pivotal trial of single agent sunitinib as first line therapy for RCC, in which the 6-month progression free survival rate was 74%. Trial treatment is administered in 12-week (wk) cycles consisting of 4 wks of sunitinib (50 mg daily) followed by 2 wks rest, followed by 5 wks of everolimus (10 mg daily) followed by 1 wk rest. Disease progression is interpreted as failure of the most recent drug taken. Participants who stop one drug because of toxicity or disease progression, on or before the 6 month assessment, will continue the other drug until subsequent progression or prohibitive toxicity on the second drug. EVERSUN is an ANZUP Cancer Trials Group Ltd. trial coordinated by the NHMRC Clinical Trials Centre. Accrual commenced in September 2010 with 38/55 participants recruited as of the 31-Jan-12 from 17 Australian sites (ACTRN12609000643279).


2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 588-588 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristen Bibeau ◽  
Luis Féliz ◽  
Scott Barrett ◽  
Ling Na ◽  
Christine Francis Lihou ◽  
...  

588 Background: Most cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) patients (pts) are diagnosed with advanced disease and are ineligible for surgery. FGFR2 fusions or rearrangements are present in 10–16% of pts with intrahepatic CCA (iCCA) and are reported to be oncogenic drivers. However, little data are available on the role of FGFR2 genetic alterations in the response to systemic cancer therapy. FIGHT-202 is a phase 2 study of pemigatinib (a selective, potent, oral FGFR1–3 inhibitor) in pts with previously treated advanced/metastatic CCA (NCT02924376); primary results were reported at ESMO 2019. FIGHT-202 enrolled pts who progressed on ≥1 prior therapy, allowing the examination of the role of FGFR2 alterations on the response to prior therapy. The objective of this post hoc analysis was to evaluate progression free survival (PFS) on standard systemic therapy received prior to study enrollment among pts with CCA harboring FGFR2 fusions or rearrangements ( FGFR2+). Methods: Case report forms were reviewed to determine disease history and exposure to prior lines of systemic cancer therapies (LOSCT) in the advanced setting before receiving pemigatinib. Only pts with sufficient data on prior LOSCT were included in this analysis. Median PFS was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: 102 pts were included in this analysis (median age 54.5, 61.8% female). Median PFS on first-line therapy was 5.5 (95% CI: 4.0, 8.0) months. Among the 38 pts (37.3%) with ≥2 prior LOSCT, median PFS on second-line therapy was 4.4 (95% CI: 3.0, 5.3) months. Conclusions: This analysis provides data about PFS on standard systemic therapies for pts with FGFR2+ CCA. Median PFS on first-line therapy was lower than historical published data, and median PFS on second-line therapy was slightly longer than previously reported, in unselected CCA populations. Limitations of this analysis include retrospective examination of investigator reported data, and that clinical trial participants may not truly reflect a general CCA patient population. The short PFS on standard therapies in pts with FGFR2+ CCA highlights the need for development of other options including targeted therapies to improve outcomes.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document