NRG/RTOG 0837: Randomized, phase II, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of chemoradiation with or without cediranib in newly diagnosed glioblastoma.

Background: A randomized, phase II, placebo-controlled, and blinded clinical trial (NCT01062425) was conducted to determine the efficacy of cediranib, an oral pan-vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor, versus placebo in combination with radiation and temozolomide in newly diagnosed glioblastoma. Methods: Patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma were randomly assigned 2:1 to receive (1) cediranib (20 mg) in combination with radiation and temozolomide; (2) placebo in combination with radiation and temozolomide. The primary endpoint was 6-month progression-free survival (PFS) based on blinded, independent radiographic assessment of postcontrast T1-weighted and noncontrast T2-weighted MRI brain scans and was tested using a 1-sided Z test for 2 proportions. Adverse events (AEs) were evaluated per CTCAE version 4. Results: One hundred and fifty-eight patients were randomized, out of which 9 were ineligible and 12 were not evaluable for the primary endpoint, leaving 137 eligible and evaluable. 6-month PFS was 46.6% in the cediranib arm versus 24.5% in the placebo arm (P = .005). There was no significant difference in overall survival between the 2 arms. There was more grade ≥ 3 AEs in the cediranib arm than in the placebo arm (P = .02). Conclusions: This study met its primary endpoint of prolongation of 6-month PFS with cediranib in combination with radiation and temozolomide versus placebo in combination with radiation and temozolomide. There was no difference in overall survival between the 2 arms.

A Three-Arm Randomized Phase II Study of Bendamustine/Rituximab with Bortezomib Induction or Lenalidomide Continuation in Untreated Follicular Lymphoma: ECOG-ACRIN E2408.

PURPOSE: We sought to improve upon frontline bendamustine/rituximab (BR) induction therapy followed by rituximab maintenance in untreated high-risk follicular lymphoma (FL). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized to BR induction followed by 2-year rituximab maintenance (BR-R), BR with bortezomib and rituximab maintenance (BVR-R), or BR followed by lenalidomide (1 year) with rituximab maintenance (BR-LR). Dual primary objectives were complete remission (CR) rate and 1-year disease-free survival (DFS); 289 patients enrolled (NCT01216683). RESULTS: For induction, 92%, 87%, and 86% of patients randomized to BR-R, BVR-R, or BR-LR received six cycles, respectively. CR rate with BR versus BVR induction was 62% versus 75%, respectively (P = 0.04). One-year DFS rates with BR-R versus BR-LR were 85% versus 67%, respectively (P = 0.0009). This was due to an imbalance in CR rates post-BR induction and discontinuation due to adverse events (AEs). The most common grade 3-4 AEs for BVR versus BR were neutropenia and sensory neuropathy (12% vs <1%); 83% of the latter occurred with intravenous bortezomib. The most common grade 3-4 AEs related to LR versus rituximab maintenance were neutropenia 66% versus 21%, respectively (P < 0.0001), and febrile neutropenia 10% versus 2%, respectively (P = 0.05). The overall treatment-related mortality was 1.4%. With 5-year median follow-up, 3-year PFS rates for BR-R, BVR-R, and BR-LR were 77%, 82%, and 76%, respectively (P = 0.36) with OS rates of 87%, 90%, and 84%, respectively (P = 0.79). For prognostication, CR rate and POD-24 were associated with survival. CONCLUSIONS: Altogether, neither bortezomib added to BR induction nor lenalidomide added to rituximab maintenance immediately post-BR induction is recommended in untreated FL.

Prognostic value of HER2 status on circulating tumor cells in advanced-stage breast cancer patients with HER2-negative tumors.

PURPOSE: Discordance between HER2 expression in tumor tissue (tHER2) and HER2 status on circulating tumor cells (cHER2) has been reported. It remains largely underexplored whether patients with tHER2-/cHER2+ can benefit from anti-HER2 targeted therapies. METHODS: cHER2 status was determined in 105 advanced-stage patients with tHER2- breast tumors. Association between cHER2 status and progression-free survival (PFS) was analyzed by univariate and multivariate Cox models and survival differences were compared by Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Compared to the patients with low-risk cHER2 (cHER2+ < 2), those with high-risk cHER2 (cHER2+ ≥ 2) had shorter survival time and an increased risk for disease progression (hazard ratio [HR] 2.16, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.20-3.88, P = 0.010). Among the patients with high-risk cHER2, those who received anti-HER2 targeted therapies had improved PFS compared with those who did not (HR 0.30, 95% CI 0.10-0.92, P = 0.035). In comparison, anti-HER2 targeted therapy did not affect PFS among those with low-risk cHER2 (HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.36-1.38, P = 0.306). Similar results were obtained after adjusting covariates. A longitudinal analysis of 67 patients with cHER2 detected during follow-ups found that those whose cHER2 status changed from high-risk at baseline to low-risk at first follow-up exhibited a significantly improved survival compared to those whose cHER2 remained high-risk (median PFS: 11.7 weeks vs. 2.0 weeks, log-rank P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: In advanced-stage breast cancer patients with tHER2- tumors, cHER2 status has the potential to guide the use of anti-HER2 targeted therapy in patients with high-risk cHER2.

Multi-institutional phase I study of low-dose ultra-fractionated radiotherapy as a chemosensitizer for gemcitabine and erlotinib in patients with locally advanced or limited metastatic pancreatic cancer.

PURPOSE: Gemcitabine (G) has been shown to sensitize pancreatic cancer to radiotherapy but requires lower doses of G and thus delays aggressive systemic treatment, potentially leading to distant failure. We initiated a phase I trial combining ultra-fractionated low-dose radiotherapy with full dose G and erlotinib in the treatment of patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. METHODS: Patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer confined to the abdomen and an ECOG performance status (PS) of 0-1 who had received 0-1 prior regimens (without G or E) and no prior radiotherapy were eligible. Patients were treated in 21 day cycles with G IV days 1 & 8, E once PO QD, and twice daily RT fractions separated by at least 4h on days 1, 2, 8, and 9. Whole abdominal RT fields were used. Primary endpoint was to define dose limiting toxicity (DLT) and the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). RESULTS: 27 patients (median age 64 years and 15 male) were enrolled between 11/24/08 and 4/12/12. 1 patient withdrew consent prior to receiving any protocol therapy. 17 patients had a PS of 1. The majority of patients were stage IV. One DLT was noted out of 7 patients at dose level (DL) 1. Subsequently no DLTs were noted in 3 patients each enrolled at DL2-4 or 11 patients in the expansion cohort. The majority of grade 3 toxicities were hematologic with 1 grade 5 bowel perforation in dose level 1 in cycle 4. Best response in 24 evaluable patients: PR (8), stable (15), PD 1. Median survival for the entire group was 9.1 months. CONCLUSION: This phase I study combining low-dose ultra-fractionated RT as a sensitizer to full dose G plus E was well tolerated with encouraging efficacy. This represents a novel strategy worthy of further investigation in advanced pancreatic cancer patients.

Axitinib and/or bevacizumab with modified FOLFOX-6 as first-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer: a randomized phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: In this multicenter, open-label, randomized phase 2 trial, the authors evaluated the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor inhibitor axitinib, bevacizumab, or both in combination with chemotherapy as first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). METHODS: Patients with previously untreated mCRC were randomized 1:1:1 to receive continuous axitinib 5 mg twice daily, bevacizumab 5 mg/kg every 2 weeks, or axitinib 5 mg twice daily plus bevacizumab 2 mg/kg every 2 weeks, each in combination with modified 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin/oxaliplatin (FOLFOX-6). The primary endpoint was the objective response rate (ORR). RESULTS: In all, 126 patients were enrolled from August 2007 to September 2008. The ORR was numerically inferior in the axitinib arm (n = 42) versus the bevacizumab arm (n = 43; 28.6% vs 48.8%; 1-sided P = .97). Progression-free survival (PFS) (11.0 months vs 15.9 months; 1-sided P = .57) and overall survival (OS) (18.1 months vs 21.6 months; 1-sided P = .69) also were numerically inferior in the axitinib arm. Similarly, efficacy endpoints for the axitinib/bevacizumab arm (n = 41) were numerically inferior (ORR, 39%; PFS, 12.5 months; OS, 19.7 months). The patients who received axitinib had fewer treatment cycles compared with other arms. Common all-grade adverse events across all 3 treatment arms were fatigue, diarrhea, and nausea (all ≥49%). Hypertension and headache were more frequent in the patients who received axitinib. Patients in the bevacizumab arm had the longest treatment exposures and the highest rates of peripheral neuropathy. CONCLUSIONS: Neither the addition of continuous axitinib nor the axitinib/bevacizumab combination to FOLFOX-6 improved ORR, PFS, or OS compared with bevacizumab as first-line treatment of mCRC.

Preparing individuals to communicate genetic test results to their relatives: report of a randomized control trial.

This study reports a randomized clinical trial evaluating the efficacy of an intervention to prepare individuals to communicate BRCA1/BRCA2 results to family members. Women aged 18 years and older, who had genetic testing, and who had adult first-degree relatives, were randomly assigned to a communication skills-building intervention or a wellness control session. Primary outcomes were the percentage of probands sharing test results, and the level of distress associated with sharing. The ability of the theory of planned behavior variables to predict the outcomes was explored. Four hundred twenty-two women were enrolled in the study, 219 (intervention) and 203 (control). Data from 137 in the intervention group and 112 in the control group were analyzed. Two hundred forty-nine probands shared test results with 838 relatives (80.1 %). There were no significant differences between study groups in the primary outcomes. Combining data from both arms revealed that perceived control and specific social influence were associated with sharing. Probands were more likely to share genetic test results with their children, female relatives and relatives who they perceived had a favorable opinion about learning the results. The communication skills intervention did not impact sharing of test results. The proband's perception of her relative's opinion of genetic testing and her sense of control in relaying this information influenced sharing. Communication of test results is selective, with male relatives and parents less likely to be informed. Prevalent psychosocial factors play a role in the communication of genetic test results within families.

Intention to communicate BRCA1/BRCA2 genetic test results to the family.

Guided by the theory of planned behavior, this analysis explores the communication skills of women who had genetic testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2. The key outcome was intention to tell test results to adult first-degree relatives. The theory predicts that global and specific attitudes, global and specific perceived social norms, and perceived control will influence the communication of genetic test results. A logistic regression model revealed that global attitude (p < .05), specific social influence (p < .01), and perceived control (p < .05) were significant predictors of intention to tell. When gender and generation of relatives were added to the regression, participants were more likely to convey genetic test results to female than to male relatives (p < .05) and were also more likely to communicate test results to children (p < .01) or siblings (p < .05) than to parents. However, this association depended on knowing the relative's opinion of genetic testing. Intention to tell was lowest among participants who did not know their relative's opinion. These results extend the theory of planned behavior by showing that gender and generation influence intention when the relative's opinion is unknown.

A phase II clinical trial of ZD1839 (Iressa) in combination with docetaxel as first-line treatment in patients with advanced breast cancer.

This was a phase II multi-institutional trial to determine the efficacy and tolerability of gefitinib (Iressatrade) and docetaxel as first-line treatment in patients with metastatic breast cancer. All patients had histologically confirmed breast cancer with metastatic disease. They were permitted to have received adjuvant chemotherapy, but no prior docetaxel or prior chemotherapy for metastatic disease. Patients received gefitinib 250 mg once daily and docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks, until tumor progression, toxicity or other reasons for discontinuation. Thirty-three patients were enrolled and received a median of 5 cycles of treatment. The clinical benefit rate was 51.5% (95% CI: 33.5-69.2%). There were 1 confirmed complete response and 12 confirmed partial responses, and the overall objective response rate was 39.4% (95% CI: 22.9-57.9%). Four patients had stable disease for > or =24 weeks. The median duration of clinical benefit was 10.9 months (95% CI: 6.0-17.6 months). The most common reason for study discontinuation was disease progression (16 patients), followed by toxicity (ten patients). Toxicities were mainly attributable to docetaxel, including > or =grade 3 neutropenia in 43% of patients. The combination of gefitinib and docetaxel is an active regimen in patients with previously untreated metastatic breast cancer, with a clinical benefit rate and toxicity profile in the range of that reported for docetaxel alone.

Pemetrexed/oxaliplatin for first-line treatment of patients with advanced colorectal cancer: a phase II trial of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Foundation Research Program.

BACKGROUND: Pemetrexed and oxaliplatin have clinical activity as single agents in colorectal cancer (response rates, 10%-17%). In this study, these drugs were used in combination as first-line therapy in a group of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifty-four evaluable patients were to receive pemetrexed (500 mg/m2) with folic acid and vitamin B12 supplementation and oxaliplatin (120 mg/m2) every 21 days for 6 cycles or until disease progression occurred. Patients with stable or responding disease could continue therapy beyond 6 cycles at the discretion of the investigator. Eligibility criteria included a diagnosis of untreated metastatic adenocarcinoma of the colon or rectum, measurable disease, Zubrod performance status or=12 weeks life expectancy. RESULTS: The confirmed clinical response rate (primary endpoint) was 29.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 18%-48.6%), with 1 complete response and 15 partial responses. Median time to progression was 5.3 months (95% CI, 3.9-6.3 months), and median survival was 12.3 months (95% CI, 8.6-17 months). Grade 3/4 nadir neutropenia occurred in 33.3% of patients, and 3 patients experienced grade 3 febrile neutropenia or infection associated with grade 3/4 neutropenia. Grade 3/4 nadir thrombocytopenia was seen in 11.1% of patients. Only 4% of the patients developed grade 3/4 neurotoxicity. CONCLUSION: This regimen of pemetrexed and oxaliplatin has activity in advanced colorectal cancer, and the toxicity profile suggests that escalation of the dose of pemetrexed in this combination may be possible.