Pathologic Complete Response and Individual Patient Prognosis After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Plus Anti-Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 Therapy of Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Positive Early Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: The achievement of pathologic complete response (pCR) is strongly prognostic for event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with early breast cancer (EBC), and adapting postneoadjuvant therapy improves long-term outcomes for patients with HER2-positive disease not achieving pCR. We sought to investigate prognostic factors for EFS and OS among patients with and without pCR after neoadjuvant systemic treatment consisting of chemotherapy plus anti-HER2 therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used individual data from 3,710 patients randomly assigned in 11 neoadjuvant trials for HER2-positive EBC with ≥100 patients enrolled, available data for pCR, EFS, and OS, and follow-up ≥3 years. We assessed baseline clinical tumor size (cT) and clinical nodal status (cN) as prognostic factors using stratified (by trial and treatment) Cox models separately for hormone receptor-positive versus hormone receptor-negative disease, and for patients who had pCR (pCR+; ypT0/is, ypN0) versus patients who did not achieve a pCR (pCR-). RESULTS: The median follow-up overall was 61.2 months. In pCR+ patients, cT and cN were significant independent prognostic factors for EFS, whereas only cT was a significant predictor for OS. In pCR- patients, cT, cN, and hormone receptor status were significant independent predictors for both EFS and OS. Regardless of hormone receptor status, cT, and cN, the 5-year EFS/OS rates were higher in pCR+ patients than in pCR- patients. In most subsets with regards to hormone receptor and pCR status, cT and cN were independent prognostic factors for both EFS and OS, including pCR+ patients. CONCLUSION: These results confirm that patients achieving pCR have far better survival outcomes than patients who do not. The traditional poor prognostic features, namely tumor size and nodal status, remain important even after a pCR.

Re-Evaluation of Pathologic Complete Response as a Surrogate for Event-Free and Overall Survival in Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Positive, Early Breast Cancer Treated With Neoadjuvant Therapy Including Anti-Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 Therapy.

PURPOSE: Pathologic complete response (pCR) has prognostic importance and is frequently used as a primary end point, but doubts remain about its validity as a surrogate for event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive, early breast cancer. METHODS: We obtained individual-patient data from randomized trials of neoadjuvant anti-HER2 therapy that enrolled at least 100 patients, had data for pCR, EFS, and OS, and a median follow-up of at least 3 years. We quantified the patient-level association between pCR (defined as ypT0/Tis ypN0) and both EFS and OS using odds ratios (ORs, with ORs >1.00 indicating a benefit from achieving a pCR). We quantified the trial-level association between treatment effects on pCR and on EFS and OS using R2 (with values above 0.75 considered as indicating strong associations). RESULTS: Eleven of 15 eligible trials had data for analysis (3,980 patients, with a median follow-up of 62 months). Considering all trials, we found strong patient-level associations, with ORs of 2.64 (95% CI, 2.20 to 3.07) for EFS and 3.15 (95% CI, 2.38 to 3.91) for OS; however, trial-level associations were weak, with an unadjusted R2 of 0.23 (95% CI, 0 to 0.66) for EFS and 0.02 (95% CI, 0 to 0.17) for OS. We found qualitatively similar results when grouping trials according to different clinical questions, when analyzing only patients with hormone receptor-negative disease, and when using a more stringent definition of pCR (ypT0 ypN0). CONCLUSION: Although pCR may be useful for patient management, it cannot be considered as a surrogate for EFS or OS in neoadjuvant trials of HER2-positive, operable breast cancer.

Evorpacept alone and in combination with pembrolizumab or trastuzumab in patients with advanced solid tumours (ASPEN-01): a first-in-human, open-label, multicentre, phase 1 dose-escalation and dose-expansion study.

BACKGROUND: Both innate and adaptive immune responses are important components of anticancer immunity. The CD47-SIRPα interaction could represent an important pathway used by tumour cells to evade immune surveillance. We aimed to evaluate the safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and anticancer activity of evorpacept (also known as ALX148), a high-affinity CD47-blocking protein with an inactive IgG Fc region in patients with solid tumours. METHODS: We did a first-in-human, open-label, multicentre, phase 1 dose-escalation and dose-expansion study at nine hospitals and one clinic in the USA and Korea. Eligible patients for the dose-escalation and safety lead-in phases were aged 18 years or older with histological or cytological diagnosis of advanced or metastatic solid tumours with no available standard therapy, measurable or unmeasurable disease according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 or 1. In the dose-escalation phase, which used a 3 + 3 design, patients received intravenous evorpacept at either 0·3, 1, 3, or 10 mg/kg once per week in 21-day cycles, or 30 mg/kg once every other week in 28-day cycles. In the safety lead-in phase, patients were given the maximum tolerable dose of evorpacept from the dose-escalation phase plus either intravenous pembrolizumab (200 mg administered once every 3 weeks) or intravenous trastuzumab (8 mg/kg loading dose followed by 6 mg/kg once every 3 weeks). In the dose-expansion phase, additional patients aged 18 years or older with second-line or later-line advanced malignancies were enrolled into three parallel cohorts: those with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) and those with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) were given the maximum tolerated dose of evorpacept plus intravenous pembrolizumab (200 mg administered once every 3 weeks), and patients with HER2-positive gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer were given the maximum tolerated dose of evorpacept plus intravenous trastuzumab (8 mg/kg loading dose followed by 6 mg/kg once every 3 weeks) until disease progression, voluntary withdrawal from the study, or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was the maximum tolerated dose of evorpacept administered as a single agent and in combination with pembrolizumab or trastuzumab, measured by the occurrence of dose-limiting toxicities during the first cycle, and was assessed in all patients who had received at least one dose of evorpacept. Secondary outcomes included the safety, tolerability, and antitumour activity of evorpacept, alone or in combination with pembrolizumab or trastuzumab. The primary outcome, safety, and tolerability were assessed in all patients who had received at least one dose of evorpacept, and antitumour activity was assessed in those who recieved at least one dose of study treatment and underwent at least one post-baseline tumor assessment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03013218. FINDINGS: Between March 6, 2017, and Feb 21, 2019, 110 patients received single-agent evorpacept (n=28), evorpacept plus pembrolizumab (n=52), or evorpacept plus trastuzumab (n=30), and were included in the safety analysis. Median follow-up was 29·1 months (95% CI not calculable [NC]-NC) in the single-agent cohort, 27·0 months (25·1-28·8) in the evorpacept plus pembrolizumab cohort, and 32·7 months (27·0-32·7) in the evorpacept plus trastuzumab cohort. Two (7%) dose-limiting toxicities in the first cycle were reported in patients who received single-agent evorpacept; neutropenia with an associated infection in one patient with gastroesophageal junction cancer who received 3 mg/kg once per week, and thrombocytopenia with associated bleeding in one patient with pancreatic cancer who received 30 mg/kg once every other week. No maximum tolerated dose was reached; the maximum administered doses were 10 mg/kg once per week or 30 mg/kg once every other week. The 10 mg/kg once per week dose was used in the expansion cohorts in combination with pembrolizumab or trastuzumab. The most common grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events were thrombocytopenia with single-agent evorpacept (two [7%] patients) and evorpacept plus pembrolizumab (two [4%]), and thrombocytopenia (two [7%]) and neutropenia (two [7%]) with evorpacept plus trastuzumab. In patients who received single-agent evorpacept, four treatment-related serious adverse events were reported. Five serious treatment-related adverse events related to evorpacept plus pembrolizumab were reported, and one serious adverse event related to evorpacept plus trastuzumab was reported. In response-evaluable patients in the dose-escalation phase (n=15) receiving single-agent evorpacept once per week, four (27%) had a best overall response of stable disease (two received 0·3 mg/kg, one received 3 mg/kg, and one received 10 mg/kg); in the 11 patients who received single-agent evorpacept at the highest dose of 30 mg/kg once every other week, two (18%) had stable disease. In the dose-expansion cohort, overall responses were recorded in four (20·0%; 95% CI 5·7-43·7) of 20 patients with HNSCC who received evorpacept plus pembrolizumab, in one (5·0%; 0·1-24·9) of 20 patients with NSCLC who received evorpacept plus pembrolizumab, and in four (21·1%; 6·1-45·6) of 19 patients with gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer who received evorpacept plus trastuzumab. INTERPRETATION: The safety findings support the use of evorpacept in combination with pembrolizumab or trastuzumab for patients with advanced solid tumours. Preliminary antitumour activity results support future investigation of evorpacept combined with pembrolizumab or trastuzumab in patients with HNSCC, gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer, and NSCLC. FUNDING: ALX Oncology.

Evaluating the potential of relapse-free survival as a surrogate for overall survival in the adjuvant therapy of melanoma with checkpoint inhibitors.

INTRODUCTION: Recent changes in the adjuvant treatment of melanoma have raised interest in confirming relapse-free survival (RFS) as a surrogate for overall survival (OS). METHODS: We explore this issue with the meta-analytic framework, using individual patient data from the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) 18071 trial of ipilimumab and published results from other adjuvant trials. RESULTS: The individual patient data analysis results at a median follow-up of 5.3 years showed a strong association between RFS and OS at the patient level (ρ = 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.82-0.87) and a moderate association at the trial level (R2 = 0.59; 95% CI: 0.08-1.00). CONCLUSIONS: The trial-level association previously observed in interferon-based trials appeared to be maintained when the EORTC 18071 results were added to a regression analysis using published results from other trials. More data from adjuvant trials are required to confirm the strength of association between RFS and OS in this setting.

Disease-free survival as a surrogate for overall survival in patients with HER2-positive, early breast cancer in trials of adjuvant trastuzumab for up to 1 year: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Although frequently used as a primary endpoint, disease-free survival has not been validated as a surrogate for overall survival in early breast cancer. We investigated this surrogacy in the adjuvant setting of treatment with anti-HER2 antibodies. METHODS: In a systematic review and meta-analysis, we identified published and non-published randomised controlled trials with completed accrual and available disease-free survival and overall survival results for the intention-to-treat population as of September 2016. Bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), clinical trial registries (Clinicaltrials.gov, EU Clinical Trials Register, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and PharmNet.Bund), and trial registries from relevant pharmaceutical companies were searched. Eligibility for treatment of HER2-positive early breast cancer required at least one group to have an anti-HER antibody treatment (ie, trastuzumab, pertuzumab, or trastuzumab emtansine) planned for 12 months, and at least one control arm with chemotherapy without the antibody, a lower total dose or duration of the antibody, or observation alone. Units of analysis were contrasts: two-group trials gave rise to one contrast, whereas trials with more than two groups gave rise to more than one contrast. We excluded trials enrolling patients with recurrent, metastatic, or non-invasive disease, and those testing neoadjuvant therapy exclusively. Our primary objective was to estimate patient-level and trial-level correlations between disease-free survival and overall survival. We measured the association between disease-free survival and overall survival using Spearman's correlation coefficient (rs), and the association between hazard ratios (HRs) for disease-free survival and overall survival using R2. We computed the surrogate threshold effect, the maximum HR for disease-free survival that statistically predicts an HR for overall survival less than 1·00 in a future trial. FINDINGS: Eight trials (n=21 480 patients) gave rise to a full set (12 contrasts). Patient-level associations between disease-free and overall survival were strong (rs=0·90 [95% CI 0·89-0·90]). Trial-level associations gave rise to values of R2 of 0·75 (95% CI 0·50-1·00) for the full set. Subgroups defined by nodal status and hormone receptor status yielded qualitatively similar results. Depending on the expected number of deaths in a future trial, the surrogate threshold effects ranged from 0·56 to 0·81, based on the full set. INTERPRETATION: These findings suggest that it is appropriate to continue to use disease-free survival as a surrogate for overall survival in trials in HER-2-positive, early breast cancer. The key limitation of this study is the dependence of its results on the trials included and on the existence of an outlying trial. FUNDING: Roche Pharma AG.

The impact of data errors on the outcome of randomized clinical trials.

Background/aims Considerable human and financial resources are typically spent to ensure that data collected for clinical trials are free from errors. We investigated the impact of random and systematic errors on the outcome of randomized clinical trials. Methods We used individual patient data relating to response endpoints of interest in two published randomized clinical trials, one in ophthalmology and one in oncology. These randomized clinical trials enrolled 1186 patients with age-related macular degeneration and 736 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. The ophthalmology trial tested the benefit of pegaptanib for the treatment of age-related macular degeneration and identified a statistically significant treatment benefit, whereas the oncology trial assessed the benefit of adding cetuximab to a regimen of capecitabine, oxaliplatin, and bevacizumab for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer and failed to identify a statistically significant treatment difference. We simulated trial results by adding errors that were independent of the treatment group (random errors) and errors that favored one of the treatment groups (systematic errors). We added such errors to the data for the response endpoint of interest for increasing proportions of randomly selected patients. Results Random errors added to up to 50% of the cases produced only slightly inflated variance in the estimated treatment effect of both trials, with no qualitative change in the p-value. In contrast, systematic errors produced bias even for very small proportions of patients with added errors. Conclusion A substantial amount of random errors is required before appreciable effects on the outcome of randomized clinical trials are noted. In contrast, even a small amount of systematic errors can severely bias the estimated treatment effects. Therefore, resources devoted to randomized clinical trials should be spent primarily on minimizing sources of systematic errors which can bias the analyses, rather than on random errors which result only in a small loss in power.

Relationship Between Carfilzomib Dose and Efficacy Outcomes in Patients With Relapsed and/or Refractory Multiple Myeloma.

BACKGROUND: Carfilzomib is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (MM) who have received at least 2 previous treatments. The approval was based on phase II trials that used a starting dose of 20 mg/m(2) escalated to a target dose of 27 mg/m(2) in cycle 2. We examined dose-outcome relationships in MM patients who received these 2 carfilzomib doses. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patient data from 4 cohorts of MM patients treated with single-agent carfilzomib in phase II trials were examined post hoc. The relationship between administered doses and overall response rate (ORR) was assessed using logistic regression models. Secondary analyses were performed using Cox regression models to assess the association between administered doses and time to event outcomes and using generalized estimating equations for cycle-specific response status (CSRS). RESULTS: A total of 476 intention to treat patients were enrolled, 461 of whom were evaluable for efficacy. In the primary analysis, adjustment for cohort and baseline covariates yielded an odds ratio for ORR of 1.28 (95% confidence interval, 1.16-1.41; P < .001) for each 1 mg/m(2) increase in the average administered dose of carfilzomib per patient (up to 27 mg/m(2)). Qualitatively similar and statistically significant results were seen for the association between administered dose and CSRS, duration of response, time to progression, progression-free survival, and overall survival when adjusted for cohort and baseline covariates. CONCLUSION: This post hoc analysis provides evidence for a dose-response relationship between the administered dose of carfilzomib and efficacy.

Prediction of survival benefits from progression-free survival benefits in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: evidence from a meta-analysis of 2334 patients from 5 randomised trials.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether progression-free survival (PFS) can be considered a surrogate endpoint for overall survival (OS) in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). DESIGN: Meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomised trials. SETTING: Five randomised controlled trials comparing docetaxel-based chemotherapy with vinorelbine-based chemotherapy for the first-line treatment of NSCLC. PARTICIPANTS: 2331 patients with advanced NSCLC. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Surrogacy of PFS for OS was assessed through the association between these endpoints and between the treatment effects on these endpoints. The surrogate threshold effect was the minimum treatment effect on PFS required to predict a non-zero treatment effect on OS. RESULTS: The median follow-up of patients still alive was 23.4 months. Median OS was 10 months and median PFS was 5.5 months. The treatment effects on PFS and OS were correlated, whether using centres (R²=0.62, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.72) or prognostic strata (R²=0.72, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.84) as units of analysis. The surrogate threshold effect was a PFS hazard ratio (HR) of 0.49 using centres or 0.53 using prognostic strata. CONCLUSIONS: These analyses provide only modest support for considering PFS as an acceptable surrogate for OS in patients with advanced NSCLC. Only treatments that have a major impact on PFS (risk reduction of at least 50%) would be expected to also have a significant effect on OS. Whether these results also apply to targeted therapies is an open question that requires independent evaluation.

Leukemia-free survival as a surrogate end point for overall survival in the evaluation of maintenance therapy for patients with acute myeloid leukemia in complete remission.

BACKGROUND: In trials designed to evaluate new therapies for hematologic malignancies, end points such as leukemia-free survival are often used as surrogates for overall survival in acute leukemia. We aimed to assess whether leukemia-free survival is an acceptable statistical surrogate for overall survival when applied to remission maintenance therapy for acute myeloid leukemia. DESIGN AND METHODS: Data were analyzed from a randomized Phase III trial of remission maintenance immunotherapy with histamine dihydrochloride plus low-dose interleukin-2 versus no treatment in adults with acute myeloid leukemia. A two-stage surrogate validation model was applied in which correlations between Kaplan-Meier estimates of leukemia-free survival and overall survival, and between log hazard ratios reflecting treatment effects were analyzed. Country of patient enrollment was the unit of analysis. RESULTS: Kaplan-Meier estimates of overall survival at 36, 48, and 60 months and leukemia-free survival at 24 months were reasonably correlated (R(2) ranging from 0.44 to 0.84) both for the overall (n=320) and first complete remission (n=261) populations. The effects of histamine dihydrochloride/interleukin-2 on log hazard ratios for leukemia-free survival and overall survival were well correlated (R(2)=0.88-0.93). CONCLUSIONS: The significant correlations between overall survival and the surrogate end point (leukemia-free survival) and between the effect of histamine dihydrochloride/interleukin-2 on leukemia-free survival and overall survival satisfy the two-stage surrogate validation model.

Individual patient data meta-analysis of randomized trials evaluating IL-2 monotherapy as remission maintenance therapy in acute myeloid leukemia.

IL-2 is a natural, T cell-derived cytokine that stimulates the cytotoxic functions of T and natural killer cells. IL-2 monotherapy has been evaluated in several randomized clinical trials (RCTs) for remission maintenance in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in first complete remission (CR1), and none demonstrated a significant benefit of IL-2 monotherapy. The objective of this meta-analysis was to reliably determine IL-2 efficacy by combining all available individual patient data (IPD) from 5 RCTs (N = 905) and summary data from a sixth RCT (N = 550). Hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated using Cox regression models stratified by trial, with HR < 1 indicating treatment benefit. Combined IPD showed no benefit of IL-2 over no treatment in terms of leukemia-free survival (HR = 0.97; P = .74) or overall survival (HR = 1.08; P = .39). Analyses including the sixth RCT yielded qualitatively identical results (leukemia-free survival HR = 0.96, P = .52; overall survival HR = 1.06; P = .46). No significant heterogeneity was found between the trials. Prespecified subset analyses showed no interaction between the lack of IL-2 effect and any factor, including age, sex, baseline performance status, karyotype, AML subtype, and time from achievement of CR1 to initiation of maintenance therapy. We conclude that IL-2 alone is not an effective remission maintenance therapy for AML patients in CR1.

Assessment of the consistency and robustness of results from a multicenter trial of remission maintenance therapy for acute myeloid leukemia.

BACKGROUND: Data from a randomized multinational phase 3 trial of 320 adults with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) demonstrated that maintenance therapy with 3-week cycles of histamine dihydrochloride plus low-dose interleukin-2 (HDC/IL-2) for up to 18 months significantly improved leukemia-free survival (LFS) but lacked power to detect an overall survival (OS) difference. PURPOSE: To assess the consistency of treatment benefit across patient subsets and the robustness of data with respect to trial centers and endpoints. METHODS: Forest plots were constructed with hazard ratios (HRs) of HDC/IL-2 treatment effects versus no treatment (control) for prospectively defined patient subsets. Inconsistency coefficients (I²) and interaction tests (X²) were used to detect any differences in benefit among subsets. Robustness of results to the elimination of individual study centers was performed using "leave-one-center-out" analyses. Associations between treatment effects on the endpoints were evaluated using weighted linear regression between HRs for LFS and OS estimated within countries. RESULTS: The benefit of HDC/IL-2 over controls was statistically consistent across all subsets defined by baseline prognostic variables. I² and P-values of X² ranged from 0.00 to 0.51 and 0.14 to 0.91, respectively. Treatment effects were statistically significant in 14 of 28 subsets analyzed. The "leave-one-center-out" analysis confirmed that no single center dominated (P-values ranged from 0.004 to 0.020 [mean 0.009]). The HRs representing the HDC/IL-2 effects on LFS and OS were strongly correlated at the country level (R² = 0.84). LIMITATIONS: Small sample sizes in some of the subsets analyzed. CONCLUSIONS: These analyses confirm the consistency and robustness of the HDC/IL-2 effect as compared with no treatment. LFS may be an acceptable surrogate for OS in future AML trials. Analyses of consistency and robustness may aid interpretation of data from multicenter trials, especially in populations with rare diseases, when the size of randomized clinical trials is limited. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00003991.