Clinical Trial Protocol for ROSELLA: a phase 3 study of relacorilant in combination with nab-paclitaxel versus nab-paclitaxel monotherapy in advanced platinum-resistant ovarian cancer.

BACKGROUND: Ovarian cancer has the highest mortality among gynecologic cancers, primarily because it typically is diagnosed at a late stage and because of the development of chemoresistance in recurrent disease. Improving outcomes in women with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer is a substantial unmet need. Activation of the glucocorticoid receptor (GR) by cortisol has been shown to suppress the apoptotic pathways used by cytotoxic agents, limiting their efficacy. Selective GR modulation may be able to counteract cortisol's antiapoptotic effects, enhancing chemotherapy's efficacy. A previous phase 2 study has shown that adding intermittently dosed relacorilant, a selective GR modulator, to nab-paclitaxel improved outcomes, including progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), with minimal added toxicity, in women with recurrent platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. The ROSELLA study aims to confirm and expand on these findings in a larger population. METHODS: ROSELLA is a phase 3, randomized, 2-arm, open-label, global multicenter study in women with recurrent, platinum-resistant, high-grade serous epithelial ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancer. Eligible participants have received 1 to 3 lines of prior systemic anticancer therapy, including ≥1 prior line of platinum therapy and prior treatment with bevacizumab, with documented progressive disease or intolerance to the most recent therapy. There is no biomarker-based requirement for participant selection. Participants are randomized 1:1 to receive intermittently dosed relacorilant in combination with nab-paclitaxel or nab-paclitaxel monotherapy. The study's primary efficacy endpoint is PFS as assessed by blinded independent central review. Secondary efficacy endpoints include OS, investigator-assessed PFS, objective response rate, best overall response, duration of response, clinical benefit rate at 24 weeks, and cancer antigen 125 response. The study is also evaluating safety and patient-reported outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05257408; European Union Drug Regulating Authorities Clinical Trials Database Identifier: 2022-000662-18.

A Randomized Phase 2 Study of Gefitinib With or Without Pemetrexed as First-line Treatment in Nonsquamous NSCLC With EGFR Mutation: Final Overall Survival and Biomarker Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Clinical studies have shown that a combination of a tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) and pemetrexed overcame acquired resistance to epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) TKI in NSCLC. Previously, pemetrexed+gefintib (P+G) had improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared with gefitinib. We present OS, updated PFS, biomarker analysis, and safety of P+G versus gefitinib. METHODS: This was a phase 2, multicenter, randomized study conducted in East Asian patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC with EGFR mutations. Patients were randomized (2:1) to receive P+G (500 mg/m2 intravenously 3-weekly + 250 mg/day orally) or gefitinib. RESULTS: In total, 191 patients (P+G, n=126; gefitinib, n=65) comprised the intent-to-treat and safety populations. Median OS was 43.4 months in P+G versus 36.8 months in gefitinib arm; adjusted HR 0.77 (95% CI, 0.5-1.2); one-sided P=0.105. Median PFS was significantly longer in the P+G (16.2 months) versus gefitinib arm (11.1 months); adjusted HR 0.67 (95% CI, 0.5-0.9); one-sided P=0.009. In the P+G and gefitinib arms, median PFS was 22.6 and 11.0 months, respectively, in patients with low thymidylate synthase (TS) expression, and 12.6 and 9.9 months, respectively, in patients with high TS expression. Common second-line post-discontinuation systemic therapies were EGFR-TKIs and chemotherapy. Most patients experienced at least one adverse event. CONCLUSIONS: Addition of pemetrexed to EGFR TKI gefitinib resulted in significantly improved PFS and numerically longer OS compared with gefitinib in treatment-naïve patients with EGFR-mutated advanced nonsquamous NSCLC. Low TS expression appeared to be a good predictor for treatment outcomes.

Ramucirumab Safety in East Asian Patients: A Meta-Analysis of Six Global, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Phase III Clinical Trials.

Purpose Several ramucirumab trials have reported a higher incidence of selected adverse events (AEs) in East Asian (EA) patients with cancer versus non-EA patients. A meta-analysis was conducted across six completed phase III trials to establish the safety parameters of ramucirumab in EA compared with non-EA patients. Materials and Methods Six global, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III registration trials investigating ramucirumab were assessed. Relative risks (RRs) and 95% CIs were calculated for selected all-grade and grade ≥ 3 AEs using fixed-effects and mixed-effects models. Ratio of RR and number needed to harm were calculated for AEs (all grade and grade ≥ 3) between EA and non-EA patients. Results Of 4,996 randomly assigned patients receiving ramucirumab or placebo, 802 (16.1%) were EA (ramucirumab, n = 411; placebo, n = 391) and 4,194 were non-EA (ramucirumab, n = 2,337; placebo, n = 1,857). Patient baseline characteristics were generally balanced between treatment arms in EA and non-EA patients, excluding sex and body weight. Grade ≥ 3 AEs possibly associated with ramucirumab, which were increased in EA versus non-EA patients, included neutropenia (42.1% v 25.5%, respectively) and proteinuria (3.9% v 0.6%, respectively). There was an increase in the RR of several grade ≥ 3 AEs, including hypertension and proteinuria, in ramucirumab-treated EA and non-EA patients compared with placebo. The ratio of RR revealed no significant differences between EA and non-EA patients for all-grade and grade ≥ 3 AEs. Conclusion Despite the enhanced propensity of selected AEs in EA patients relative to non-EA patients, there were no substantial differences in the RR for AEs possibly associated with ramucirumab in these phase III trials.

Subgroup analysis of East Asian patients in REGARD: A phase III trial of ramucirumab and best supportive care for advanced gastric cancer.

AIM: We describe a subgroup analysis assessing the efficacy and safety of ramucirumab monotherapy in East Asian (EA) patients from the REGARD trial. METHODS: Patients with advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma with progressive disease were randomized 2:1 to receive ramucirumab (8 mg/kg) plus best supportive care (BSC) or placebo plus BSC every 2 weeks. Post hoc subset analyses were performed on the EA and non-EA intention-to-treat populations. RESULTS: Of 355 intention-to-treat patients, 26 patients from EA were randomized to ramucirumab (n = 18) or placebo (n = 8). Median overall survival was 6.5 months in the ramucirumab arm and 4.8 months in the placebo arm (hazard ratio [HR] 0.69; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.27-1.82) for EA patients, and 5.2 months in the ramucirumab arm and 3.8 months in the placebo arm (HR 0.78; 95% CI, 0.60-1.02) for non-EA patients. The rate of disease control was numerically higher in ramucirumab patients versus placebo; 61% versus 38% respectively for EA patients, and 48% versus 22% for non-EA patients. The incidence of grade ≥3 treatment emergent adverse events was higher in the ramucirumab arm compared to placebo (39% vs 13%). CONCLUSION: Despite limitations, this subgroup analysis suggests that ramucirumab monotherapy improves efficacy outcomes with a tolerable safety profile in EA patients with previously treated advanced gastric cancer.

Dynamic change of fatigue of pemetrexed maintenance treatment in the JMEN trial.

OBJECTIVES: In the JMEN trial, patients with advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) without progression after platinum-based first-line therapy derived extended survival, delayed disease progression, and maintained overall quality of life (QoL) from pemetrexed maintenance therapy. However, fatigue was the most common physician-reported non-hematological toxicity in the pemetrexed group. This post hoc analysis investigated dynamic change of fatigue. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Analysis of the overall safety population with squamous and non-squamous NSCLC subgroups included Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events to summarize adverse event (AE) rates by cycle and AE investigator-reported severity. Worsening of fatigue, defined as +15mm or more from baseline on a 100mm scale, evaluated QoL using the patient-reported Lung Cancer Symptom Scale. Patients with worsening fatigue and time-to-worsening of fatigue symptoms were also analyzed. RESULTS: Drug-related fatigue occurred more frequently with pemetrexed than placebo. The drug-related grade 3/4 fatigue was also higher in the overall population on pemetrexed than with placebo. Fatigue incidence during pemetrexed maintenance after induction was not altered with cumulative exposure. Percentage of patients who experienced worsening of fatigue based on patient-reported LCSS scores was comparable between the two arms in cycles 1-10. The time-to-worsening of fatigue was similar between the pemetrexed arm and the placebo arm in the overall population; however, the East Asian subpopulation patients taking pemetrexed experienced a longer median time-to-worsening of fatigue than patients taking placebo. CONCLUSION: Analyses suggest that despite higher incidence of any grade drug-related fatigue compared with placebo in patients with advanced NSCLC, pemetrexed maintenance does not impair patient-reported QoL.

A Review of Regimens Combining Pemetrexed With an Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor in the Treatment of Advanced Nonsquamous Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

Pemetrexed is a standard first-line treatment for advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are a standard first-line treatment for advanced nonsquamous NSCLC with activating EGFR mutations. Pemetrexed and EGFR TKIs have different mechanisms of action and minimally overlapping toxicity profiles; therefore, it is hypothesized that their combination might result in acceptable toxicity, provided that the synergistic antitumor activity observed in preclinical studies is achieved. This review summarizes clinical trials of pemetrexed in combination with an EGFR TKI for the treatment of advanced nonsquamous NSCLC in the first- and second-line settings, using intercalated, sequential, and concurrent treatment strategies. As would be expected, such strategies were most efficacious in patients with the activating EGFR mutations associated with response to an EGFR TKI. In the studies that compared a pemetrexed-EGFR TKI combination with pemetrexed alone or the EGFR TKI alone, the pemetrexed-EGFR TKI combination was more efficacious than the single-agent regimens. The pemetrexed-EGFR TKI combinations were generally associated with a higher incidence of grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events than the single-agent regimens; however, such toxicities were clinically manageable. Future studies of pemetrexed-EGFR TKI combinations should focus on optimizing treatment strategies in patients with activating EGFR mutations.

Age does not influence efficacy of ramucirumab in advanced gastric cancer: Subgroup analyses of REGARD and RAINBOW.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: REGARD and RAINBOW were global, phase 3, randomized, double-blind trials of second-line ramucirumab for metastatic gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma. Exploratory subgroup analyses were described to assess the efficacy and safety of ramucirumab in REGARD and RAINBOW in young (≤ 45 and < 65 years) and elderly (≥ 65, ≥ 70, and ≥ 75 years) patients. METHODS: Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive ramucirumab plus best supportive care or placebo plus best supportive care (REGARD) or 1:1 to ramucirumab plus paclitaxel or placebo plus paclitaxel (RAINBOW). Subpopulation Treatment Effect Pattern Plots assessed efficacy and adverse events by age groups for ramucirumab versus placebo. RESULTS: The hazard ratios (HRs) for overall survival favored treatment with ramucirumab: REGARD ≤ 45 years (HR: 0.59, 95% confidence interval: 0.27-1.26), < 65 years (0.80, 0.59-1.10), ≥ 65 years (0.72, 0.48-1.08), ≥ 70 years (0.73, 0.44-1.23), and ≥ 75 years (0.59, 0.25-1.37); and RAINBOW ≤ 45 years (0.56, 0.33-0.93), < 65 years (0.78, 0.63-0.97), ≥ 65 years (0.88, 0.66-1.18), and ≥ 70 years (0.88, 0.60-1.28). The exception was elderly patients aged ≥ 75 years in RAINBOW (0.97, 0.47-2.01); however, patient numbers were low in this subgroup (n = 36). Similar findings were observed for progression-free survival, for which HRs numerically favored ramucirumab-treated patients. Adverse events (including grade ≥ 3) were not associated with age. CONCLUSIONS: In comparison with placebo, ramucirumab conferred improvements in efficacy across age groups with a tolerable safety profile. Despite some limitations, these exploratory analyses support the use of ramucirumab in advanced gastric cancer, irrespective of age.

Exposure-response relationship of ramucirumab in East Asian patients from RAINBOW: a randomized clinical trial in second-line treatment of gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: Ramucirumab is a recombinant human IgG1 neutralizing monoclonal antibody specific for vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2. Second-line ramucirumab, in conjunction with paclitaxel (ramucirumab 8 mg/kg or placebo in combination with 80 mg/m2 paclitaxel), has been shown to be effective and safe in patients with advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma in RAINBOW, a global phase III randomized clinical trial. We conducted an exploratory exposure-response analysis of efficacy and safety of ramucirumab in East Asian patients from the RAINBOW trial. METHODS: Using sparse pharmacokinetic samples collected in the RAINBOW trial, a population pharmacokinetic analysis was conducted to predict ramucirumab minimum trough concentration at steady state (C min,ss) using a nonlinear mixed-effect modeling approach. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards analyses were conducted to evaluate ramucirumab exposure (C min,ss) and efficacy relationship by overall survival and progression-free survival. Exposure-safety relationships were assessed descriptively. RESULTS: Two hundred and twenty-two East Asian patients were included in this exposure-response analysis. Higher ramucirumab C min,ss was associated with longer overall survival (p = 0.0115) and progression-free survival (p = 0.0179) in this patient cohort. Patients with higher ramucirumab C min,ss (≥56.87 ng/ml median) had higher incidences of grade ≥3 leukopenia and neutropenia, but not febrile neutropenia or hypertension. CONCLUSIONS: This exploratory analysis suggests a positive relationship between efficacy and ramucirumab exposure with manageable toxicities in East Asian patients from RAINBOW, consistent with the overall exposure-response analysis from this trial. A regimen with a higher dosage of ramucirumab warrants further consideration for East Asian patients with gastric/GEJ cancer.

Anti-angiogenic Therapy in Patients with Advanced Gastric and Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer: A Systematic Review.

Despite advancements in therapy for advanced gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancers, their prognosis remains dismal. Tumor angiogenesis plays a key role in cancer growth and metastasis, and recent studies indicate that pharmacologic blockade of angiogenesis is a promising approach to therapy. In this systematic review, we summarize current literature on the clinical benefit of anti-angiogenic agents in advanced gastric cancer. We conducted a systematic search of PubMed and conference proceedings including the American Society of Clinical Oncology, the European Society for Medical Oncology, and the European Cancer Congress. Included studies aimed to prospectively evaluate the efficacy and safety of anti-angiogenic agents in advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer. Each trial investigated at least one of the following endpoints: overall survival, progression-free survival/time to progression, and/or objective response rate. Our search yielded 139 publications. Forty-two met the predefined inclusion criteria. Included studies reported outcomes with apatinib, axitinib, bevacizumab, orantinib, pazopanib, ramucirumab, regorafenib, sorafenib, sunitinib, telatinib, and vandetanib. Second-line therapy with ramucirumab and third-line therapy with apatinib are the only anti-angiogenic agents so far shown to significantly improve survival of patients with advanced gastric cancer. Overall, agents that specifically target the vascular endothelial growth factor ligand or receptor have better safety profile compared to multi-target tyrosine kinase inhibitors.

Efficacy and Safety of First-Line Necitumumab Plus Gemcitabine and Cisplatin Versus Gemcitabine and Cisplatin in East Asian Patients with Stage IV Squamous Non-small Cell Lung Cancer: A Subgroup Analysis of the Phase 3, Open-Label, Randomized SQUIRE Study.

PURPOSE: The phase 3 randomized SQUIRE study revealed significantly longer overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) for necitumumab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin (neci+GC) than for gemcitabine and cisplatin alone (GC) in 1,093 patients with previously untreated advanced squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This post hoc subgroup analysis assessed the efficacy and safety of neci+GC among East Asian (EA) patients enrolled in the study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients received up to six 3-week cycles of gemcitabine (days 1 and 8, 1,250 mg/m²) and cisplatin (day 1, 75 mg/m²). Patients in the neci+GC arm also received necitumumab (days 1 and 8, 800 mg) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated from stratified Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: In EA patients, there were improvements for neci+GC (n=43) versus GC (n=41) in OS (HR, 0.805; 95% CI, 0.484 to 1.341) and PFS (HR, 0.720; 95% CI, 0.439 to 1.180), consistent with the results for non-EA patients observed in the present study. The overall safety data were consistent between EA and non-EA patients. A numerically higher proportion of patients experienced serious adverse events (AEs), grade ≥ 3 AEs, and AEs with an outcome of death for neci+GC versus GC in EA patients and EA patients versus non-EA patients for neci+GC. CONCLUSION: Although limited by the small sample size and post hoc nature of the analysis, these findings are consistent with those of the overall study and suggest that neci+GC offers a survival advantage and favorable benefit/risk for EA patients with advanced squamous NSCLC.

Second-line ramucirumab therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (REACH): an East Asian and non-East Asian subgroup analysis.

PURPOSE: REACH investigated second-line ramucirumab therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. RESULTS: Median overall survival was 8.2 months for ramucirumab and 6.9 months for placebo (HR, 0.835; 95% CI, 0.634-1.100; p = 0.2046) for East Asians, and 10.1 months for ramucirumab and 8.0 months for placebo (HR, 0.895; 95% CI, 0.690-1.161; p = 0.4023) for non-East Asians. Median overall survival in patients with baseline alpha-fetoprotein ≥ 400 ng/mL was 7.8 months for ramucirumab and 4.2 months for placebo (HR, 0.749; 95% CI, 0.519-1.082; p = 0.1213) for East Asians (n = 139), and 8.2 months for ramucirumab and 4.5 months for placebo (HR, 0.579; 95% CI, 0.371-0.904; p = 0.0149) for non-East Asians (n = 111). The most common grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events in East Asians and non-East Asians included hypertension and malignant neoplasm progression. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A post-hoc analysis of East Asians (N = 252) and non-East Asians (N = 313) in the intent-to-treat population was performed. CONCLUSIONS: In East Asians and non-East Asians, ramucirumab did not significantly prolong overall survival. In patients with baseline alpha-fetoprotein ≥ 400 ng/mL, a potentially larger survival benefit was observed in both subgroups. Safety for East Asians was similar to non-East Asians.

Randomized Phase II Trial of Gefitinib With and Without Pemetrexed as First-Line Therapy in Patients With Advanced Nonsquamous Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer With Activating Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Mutations.

PURPOSE: To determine whether the addition of pemetrexed to gefitinib (P+G) provides clinical benefit, compared with gefitinib monotherapy, in patients with advanced nonsquamous (NS) non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and activating epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Chemotherapy-naïve for advanced NSCLC patients from China, Japan, Korea, and Taiwan (35 sites) with advanced, EGFR-mutant, NS NSCLC were randomly assigned (2:1; computer-generated, interactive voice response) to open-label pemetrexed (500 mg/m(2) on day 1 of every 21-day cycle) plus gefitinib (250 mg/d [n = 129]) or gefitinib alone (n = 66). The primary end point was progression-free-survival (PFS); secondary end points were time to progressive disease, overall survival, tumor response rates, duration of response, and safety. All end points were assessed in the intent-to-treat and safety population (P+G, n = 126; gefitinib alone, n = 65). RESULTS: PFS was significantly longer with P+G (median, 15.8 months; 95% CI, 12.6 to 18.3 months) than with gefitinib (median, 10.9 months; 95% CI, 9.7 to 13.8 months; adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.68; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.96; one-sided P = .014; two-sided P = .029). Results of EGFR exon 19 deletion and EGFR exon 21 L858R point mutation subgroup analyses were consistent with the intent-to-treat result. P+G, compared with gefitinib alone, resulted in significantly longer time to progressive disease (median, 16.2 v 10.9 months, respectively; HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.93) and numerically longer duration of response (median, 15.4 v 11.3 months, respectively; HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.50 to 1.08). Tumor response rates did not differ. Overall survival data are immature. Drug-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events were more common with P+G, but toxicities were manageable. CONCLUSION: P+G improved PFS compared with gefitinib alone in East Asian patients with advanced NS NSCLC and activating EGFR mutations. This combination may offer EGFR mutation-positive patients new treatment options and improved clinical outcomes compared with the current standard of care.

An East Asian subgroup analysis of PROCLAIM, a phase III trial of pemetrexed and cisplatin or etoposide and cisplatin plus thoracic radiation therapy followed by consolidation chemotherapy in locally advanced nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer.

AIM: PROCLAIM, a phase III trial of patients with nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer comparing concurrent pemetrexed-cisplatin and thoracic radiation therapy followed by consolidation pemetrexed, did not meet its primary endpoint of superior overall survival versus etoposide-cisplatin and thoracic radiation therapy followed by a consolidation platinum doublet of choice. The results from an East Asian subgroup analysis are presented here. METHODS: A subgroup analysis was performed for all patients randomized from China (n = 61), Taiwan (n = 25), and Korea (n = 11). RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were balanced between treatment arms for East Asian patients. In the 97 randomized East Asian patients, median overall survival was 26.8 months for the pemetrexed-cisplatin arm and 36.3 months for the etoposide-cisplatin arm (hazard ratio: 1.23; 95% confidence interval: 0.70-2.14; P = 0.469). Median progression-free survival was 10.0 months for the pemetrexed-cisplatin arm and 7.6 months for the etoposide-cisplatin arm (hazard ratio: 0.97; 95% confidence interval: 0.61-1.54; P = 0.890). The objective response rate was 47.7% in the pemetrexed-cisplatin arm and 34.0% in the etoposide-cisplatin arm (P = 0.167). In the 90 treated East Asian patients, the overall incidence of drug-related grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events was significantly lower in the pemetrexed-cisplatin arm versus the etoposide-cisplatin arm (61.4% vs 91.3%; P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: For East Asian patients, pemetrexed-cisplatin combined with thoracic radiation therapy, followed by consolidation pemetrexed, did not improve overall survival but did have a good safety profile with a trend for improved progression-free survival and objective response rate compared to standard chemoradiotherapy for stage III unresectable nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer.

Meta-Analysis of First-Line Pemetrexed Plus Platinum Treatment in Compared to Other Platinum-Based Doublet Regimens in Elderly East Asian Patients With Advanced Nonsquamous Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Pemetrexed plus platinum has become a standard of care in first-line treatment for patients with advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer. However, elderly lung cancer patients are generally understudied and undertreated in clinical practice in East Asia because of safety concerns. This analysis aimed to provide a picture of the clinical benefit of pemetrexed/platinum in the first-line setting for elderly (age ≥ 65 years) East Asian patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Individual patient data from 3 randomized controlled phase 3 trials that enrolled East Asian patients were analyzed in this meta-analysis. RESULTS: In elderly East Asian patients (63 in the pemetrexed/platinum group and 42 in the control group), pemetrexed/platinum treatment achieved more benefits compared to other platinum-based doublets, including better overall response rate (32.8% vs. 7.5%), favorable progression-free survival (not statistically significant in adjusted hazard ratio), and significantly longer (3.15 vs. 1.54 months) survival without drug-related grade 3/4 toxicity. Overall survival was numerically prolonged (16.33 vs. 13.77 months; not statistically significant). These benefit trends were similar to those in all-age East Asian patients. In elderly East Asians, pemetrexed/platinum treatment was also associated with a lower incidence rate of drug-related grade 3/4 adverse events. The adverse event profile was similar to that in all-age East Asians. There were no unexpected adverse events. CONCLUSION: Pemetrexed/platinum had good efficacy and also resulted in better overall response and tolerability than other platinum-based doublets as first-line treatment in nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer in elderly East Asians, which was consistent with data observed in all-age East Asians.

East Asian Subgroup Analysis of a Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase 3 Study of Docetaxel and Ramucirumab Versus Docetaxel and Placebo in the Treatment of Stage IV Non-small Cell Lung Cancer Following Disease Progression after One Prior Platinum-Based Therapy (REVEL).

PURPOSE: REVEL demonstrated improved overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and objective response rate (ORR) with docetaxel+ramucirumab versus docetaxel+placebo in 1,253 intent-to-treat (ITT) stage IV non-small cell lung cancer patients with disease progression following platinum-based chemotherapy. Results from the East Asian subgroup analysis are reported. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Subgroup analyses were performed in the East Asian ITT population (n=89). Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazards regression were performed for OS and PFS, and the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test was performed for response rate. RESULTS: In docetaxel+ramucirumab (n=43) versus docetaxel+placebo (n=46), median OS was 15.44 months versus 10.17 months (hazard ratio [HR], 0.762; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.444 to 1.307), median PFS was 4.88 months versus 2.79 months (HR, 0.658; 95% CI, 0.408 to 1.060), and ORR was 25.6% (95% CI, 13.5 to 41.2) versus 8.7% (95% CI, 2.4 to 20.8). Due to increased incidence of neutropenia and febrile neutropenia in East Asian patients, starting dose of docetaxel was reduced for newly enrolled East Asian patients (75 to 60 mg/m2, n=24). In docetaxel+ramucirumab versus docetaxel+placebo, incidence of neutropenia was 84.4% versus 72.7% (75 mg/m2) and 54.5% versus 38.5% (60 mg/m2). Incidence of febrile neutropenia was 43.8% versus 12.1% (75 mg/m2) and 0% versus 7.7% (60 mg/m2). CONCLUSION: Results of this subgroup analysis showed a trend favoring ramucirumab+docetaxel for median OS, PFS, and improved ORR in East Asian patients, consistent with ITT population results. Reduction of starting dose of docetaxel in East Asian patients was associated with improved safety.

First-Line Pemetrexed plus Cisplatin followed by Gefitinib Maintenance Therapy versus Gefitinib Monotherapy in East Asian Never-Smoker Patients with Locally Advanced or Metastatic Nonsquamous Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Final Overall Survival Results from a Randomized Phase 3 Study.

INTRODUCTION: The primary analysis of this open-label, randomized, multicenter phase 3 study revealed no significant difference in progression-free survival between pemetrexed plus cisplatin followed by maintenance gefitinib (PC/G) and gefitinib monotherapy (G) in patients with advanced nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and unknown epidermal growth factor receptor gene (EGFR) mutation status; however, the hazard ratio favored PC/G. This report describes the final overall survival (OS) results. METHODS: Chemonaive, East Asian light ex-smokers/never-smokers with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC and unknown EGFR mutation status were randomized (1:1) to PC/G (n = 118) or G (n = 118). EGFR mutation status was retrospectively determined for 76 patients, 52 (68.4%) of whom had EGFR-mutated tumors (exon 19 deletions in 26 and L858R point mutation in 24). OS was analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method. The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01017874). RESULTS: Median OS was similar in the PC/G (26.9 months) and G (27.9 months) groups (hazard ratio = 0.94, 95% confidence interval: 0.68-1.31, p = 0.717). Median OS was longer with PC/G than with G in patients with EGFR wild-type tumors (28.4 versus 8.9 months) and longer with G than with PC/G in patients with EGFR-mutated tumors (45.7 versus 32.4 months), especially those with exon 19 deletions. Second-line postdiscontinuation therapy was common and included chemotherapy (PC/G, 41 of 118 [34.7%]; G, 73 of 118 [61.9%]) and rechallenge with an EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (PC/G, 27 of 118 [22.9%]; G, 9 of 118 [7.6%]). CONCLUSIONS: The progression-free survival and OS results from this study further demonstrate the importance of determining EGFR mutation status to select the most appropriate first-line treatment for patients with advanced NSCLC.

First-Line Pemetrexed Plus Cisplatin Followed by Gefitinib Maintenance Therapy Versus Gefitinib Monotherapy in East Asian Never-Smoker Patients With Locally Advanced or Metastatic Nonsquamous Non-Small-cell Lung Cancer: Quality of Life Results From a Randomized Phase III Trial.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy results from an open-label, randomized, multicenter study found no significant difference in progression-free survival between pemetrexed plus cisplatin followed by maintenance gefitinib (PC/G) and gefitinib monotherapy (G) in patients with advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and unknown epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation status (hazard ratio favored PC/G). The present report describes the quality of life (QoL) results from that trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Chemotherapy-naive, East Asian, light ex-smokers or never-smokers with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC and unknown EGFR mutation status (n = 236) were randomly assigned (1:1) to PC/G or G. EGFR mutation status was subsequently determined for 74 patients. The symptoms and QoL were assessed using the Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS). The time to worsening of symptoms (TWS) was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: In the overall population, the TWS was generally longer in the G group (n = 109) than in the PC/G group (n = 109) for the LCSS symptoms classified as treatment-related (loss of appetite, fatigue) and tumor-related (cough, dyspnea, hemoptysis, pain). In the subgroup of patients with wild-type EGFR, the TWS was generally longer in the PC/G group (n = 13) than in the G group (n = 8) for the tumor-related LCSS symptoms. CONCLUSION: In this study population clinically selected to respond to gefitinib, the LCSS scores were more favorable in the G group than in the PC/G group. Patients with wild-type EGFR tended to show greater improvement in tumor-related LCSS symptoms with chemotherapy than with gefitinib alone. These LCSS outcomes provide further evidence that patients with wild-type EGFR might not benefit from first-line treatment of advanced NSCLC with gefitinib.

Subgroup analysis of East Asians in RAINBOW: A phase 3 trial of ramucirumab plus paclitaxel for advanced gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: East Asia has higher gastric cancer incidence and mortality rates than other regions. We present a subgroup analysis of East Asians in the positive study RAINBOW. METHODS: Patients with advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma previously treated with platinum and fluoropyrimidine received ramucirumab 8 mg/kg or placebo on days 1 and 15 plus paclitaxel 80 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle. RESULTS: Of 665 intention-to-treat patients, 223 were East Asian. Median overall survival was 12.1 months for ramucirumab plus paclitaxel and 10.5 months for placebo plus paclitaxel (hazard ratio: 0.986, 95% confidence interval: 0.727-1.337, P = 0.929). Median progression-free survival was 5.5 months for ramucirumab plus paclitaxel and 2.8 months for placebo plus paclitaxel (hazard ratio: 0.628, 95% confidence interval: 0.473-0.834, P = 0.001). Objective response rates were 34% for ramucirumab plus paclitaxel and 20% for placebo plus paclitaxel. Grade ≥ 3 neutropenia (60% vs 28%) and leukopenia (34% vs 13%) were higher for ramucirumab plus paclitaxel. The rate of febrile neutropenia was low (4% vs 4%). Special interest adverse events included any grade bleeding/hemorrhage (55% vs 25%), proteinuria (27% vs 7%), and hypertension (22% vs 2%). CONCLUSIONS: Ramucirumab plus paclitaxel significantly improves progression-free survival and response rate, with prolonged median overall survival and an acceptable safety profile in East Asians with advanced gastric cancer.

Tolerability and Outcomes of First-Line Pemetrexed-Cisplatin Followed by Gefitinib Maintenance Therapy Versus Gefitinib Monotherapy in Korean Patients with Advanced Nonsquamous Non-small Cell Lung Cancer: A Post Hoc Descriptive Subgroup Analysis of a Randomized, Phase 3 Trial.

PURPOSE: We recently reported on a randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial comparing pemetrexed-cisplatin chemotherapy followed by gefitinib maintenance therapy (PC/G) with gefitinib monotherapy in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Here, we report on a post hoc subgroup analysis of that study assessing the demographics and disposition of the Korean patient subgroup, and comparing the tolerability of PC/G and gefitinib monotherapy and the tumor response with respect to epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) status. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients, who were ≥ 18 years, chemonaïve, Korean, light ex-smokers/never-smokers with advanced NSCLC, were randomly assigned (1:1) to PC/G or gefitinib monotherapy. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were graded, and tumor response was measured as change in lesion sum from baseline at best response. The study was registered with ClinicalTrials. gov, NCT01017874. RESULTS: Overall, 111 Korean patients were treated (PC/G, 51; gefitinib, 60). Between-arm characteristics were balanced and similar to those of the overall population. Treatment discontinuations due to adverse events were low (PC/G: 1, 2.0%; gefitinib: 7, 11.7%). Overall, 92 patients (82.9%) reported ≥ 1 TEAE (PC/G, 44; gefitinib, 48); few patients (PC/G, 16; gefitinib, 7) reported severe TEAEs; the most frequent was neutropenia (PC/G arm) and elevated alanine aminotransferase (gefitinib arm). The lesion sum was decreased by PC/G treatment in most patients, regardless of EGFR mutation status, while gefitinib monotherapy reduced the lesion sum in EGFR-positive patients but had no effect in EGFR-negative patients. CONCLUSION: Our results confirm that both PC/G and gefitinib were well tolerated in Korean patients, regardless of EGFR status; however, patients with EGFR wild-type NSCLC may not benefit from gefitinib monotherapy.