Fruquintinib versus placebo in patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (FRESCO-2): an international, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of effective systemic therapy options for patients with advanced, chemotherapy-refractory colorectal cancer. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of fruquintinib, a highly selective and potent oral inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptors (VEGFRs) 1, 2, and 3, in patients with heavily pretreated metastatic colorectal cancer. METHODS: We conducted an international, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study (FRESCO-2) at 124 hospitals and cancer centres across 14 countries. We included patients aged 18 years or older (≥20 years in Japan) with histologically or cytologically documented metastatic colorectal adenocarcinoma who had received all current standard approved cytotoxic and targeted therapies and progressed on or were intolerant to trifluridine-tipiracil or regorafenib, or both. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive fruquintinib (5 mg capsule) or matched placebo orally once daily on days 1-21 in 28-day cycles, plus best supportive care. Stratification factors were previous trifluridine-tipiracil or regorafenib, or both, RAS mutation status, and duration of metastatic disease. Patients, investigators, study site personnel, and sponsors, except for selected sponsor pharmacovigilance personnel, were masked to study group assignments. The primary endpoint was overall survival, defined as the time from randomisation to death from any cause. A non-binding futility analysis was done when approximately one-third of the expected overall survival events had occurred. Final analysis occurred after 480 overall survival events. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04322539, and EudraCT, 2020-000158-88, and is ongoing but not recruiting. FINDINGS: Between Aug 12, 2020, and Dec 2, 2021, 934 patients were assessed for eligibility and 691 were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive fruquintinib (n=461) or placebo (n=230). Patients had received a median of 4 lines (IQR 3-6) of previous systemic therapy for metastatic disease, and 502 (73%) of 691 patients had received more than 3 lines. Median overall survival was 7·4 months (95% CI 6·7-8·2) in the fruquintinib group versus 4·8 months (4·0-5·8) in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·66, 95% CI 0·55-0·80; p<0·0001). Grade 3 or worse adverse events occurred in 286 (63%) of 456 patients who received fruquintinib and 116 (50%) of 230 who received placebo; the most common grade 3 or worse adverse events in the fruquintinib group included hypertension (n=62 [14%]), asthenia (n=35 [8%]), and hand-foot syndrome (n=29 [6%]). There was one treatment-related death in each group (intestinal perforation in the fruquintinib group and cardiac arrest in the placebo group). INTERPRETATION: Fruquintinib treatment resulted in a significant and clinically meaningful benefit in overall survival compared with placebo in patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. These data support the use of fruquintinib as a global treatment option for patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. Ongoing analysis of the quality of life data will further establish the clinical benefit of fruquintinib in this patient population. FUNDING: HUTCHMED.

Napabucasin Plus FOLFIRI in Patients With Previously Treated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Results From the Open-Label, Randomized Phase III CanStem303C Study.

PURPOSE: Napabucasin is an investigational, orally administered reactive oxygen species generator bioactivated by intracellular antioxidant NAD(P)H:quinone oxidoreductase 1 that has been evaluated in various solid tumors, including metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Phosphorylated signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (pSTAT3) is hypothesized to predict response in napabucasin-treated patients with mCRC. PATIENT AND METHODS: In the multi-center, open-label, phase III CanStem303C (NCT02753127) study, adults with histologically confirmed mCRC that progressed on first-line fluoropyrimidine plus oxaliplatin ± bevacizumab were randomized to twice-daily napabucasin plus FOLFIRI (napabucasin) or FOLFIRI alone (control). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) in the general study population and in patients with pSTAT3-positive tumors (biomarker-positive). RESULTS: In the general study population (napabucasin, n = 624; control, n = 629), median OS was 14.3 months for napabucasin and 13.8 months for control (hazard ratio [HR], 0.976, one-sided P = .74). Overall, 44% of patients were biomarker-positive (napabucasin, n = 275; control, n = 272). In the biomarker-positive population, median OS was 13.2 months for napabucasin and 12.1 months for control (HR, 0.969; one-sided P > .99). In the control arm, median OS was shorter for biomarker-positive versus biomarker negative patients (12.1 vs. 18.5 months; HR, 1.518; nominal 2-sided P = .0002). The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were diarrhea (napabucasin, 84.6%; control, 53.9%), nausea (60.5%, 50.5%), vomiting (41.2%, 29.3%), and abdominal pain (41.0%, 25.2%). Grade ≥3 TEAEs occurred in 73.8% of napabucasin-treated and 66.7% of control-treated patients, most commonly diarrhea (21.2%, 7.0%), neutrophil count decreased (13.7%, 19.2%), and neutropenia (13.3%, 15.2%). Safety was similar in biomarker-positive patients. CONCLUSION: In patients with previously treated mCRC, adding napabucasin to FOLFIRI did not improve OS. Results from the control arm indicate that pSTAT3 is an adverse prognostic factor in mCRC.

Ramucirumab in patients with previously treated advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: Impact of liver disease aetiology.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a common complication of chronic liver disease with diverse underlying aetiologies. REACH/REACH-2 were global phase III studies investigating ramucirumab in advanced HCC (aHCC) following sorafenib treatment. We performed an exploratory analysis of outcomes by liver disease aetiology and baseline serum viral load. METHODS: Meta-analysis was conducted in patients with aHCC and alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) ≥400 ng/mL (N = 542) from REACH/REACH-2 trials. Individual patient-level data were pooled with results reported by aetiology subgroup (hepatitis B [HBV] or C [HCV] and Other). Pre-treatment serum HBV DNA and HCV RNA were quantified using Roche COBAS AmpliPrep/COBAS TaqMan. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazard model (stratified by study). RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were generally balanced between arms in each subgroup (HBV: N = 225, HCV: N = 127, Other: N = 190). No significant difference in treatment effect by aetiology subgroup was detected (OS interaction P-value = .23). Median OS (ramucirumab vs placebo) in months was 7.7 versus 4.5 (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.55-0.99) for HBV, 8.2 versus 5.5 (HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.55-1.23) for HCV and 8.5 versus 5.4 (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.40-0.79) for Other. Ramucirumab showed similar overall safety profiles across subgroups. Worst outcomes were noted in patients with a detectable HBV load. Use of HBV antiviral therapy, irrespective of viral load, was beneficial for survival, liver function and liver-specific adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Ramucirumab improved survival across aetiology subgroups with a tolerable safety profile, supporting its use in patients with aHCC and elevated AFP.

Ramucirumab in elderly patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and elevated alpha-fetoprotein after sorafenib in REACH and REACH-2.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Limited data on treatment of elderly patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) increase the unmet need. REACH and REACH-2 were global phase III studies of ramucirumab in patients with HCC after prior sorafenib, where patients with alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) ≥400 ng/mL showed an overall ssurvival (OS) benefit for ramucirumab. These post-hoc analyses examined efficacy and safety of ramucirumab in patients with HCC and baseline AFP ≥ 400 ng/mL by three prespecified age subgroups (<65, ≥65 to <75 and ≥75 years). METHODS: Individual patient data were pooled from REACH (baseline AFP ≥400 ng/mL) and REACH-2. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards regression methods (stratified by study) assessed OS, progression-free survival (PFS), time to progression (TTP) and patient-reported outcomes (Functional Hepatobiliary System Index-8 [FHSI-8] score). RESULTS: A total of 542 patients (<65 years: n = 302; ≥65 to <75 years: n = 160; ≥75 years: n = 80) showed similar baseline characteristics between ramucirumab and placebo. Older subgroups had higher hepatitis C and steatohepatitis incidences, and lower AFP levels, than the <65 years subgroup. Ramucirumab prolonged OS in patients <65 years (hazard ratio [HR], 0.753; 95% CI 0.581-0.975), ≥65 to <75 years (0.602; 0.419-0.866) and ≥75 years (0.709; 0.420-1.199), PFS and TTP irrespective of age. Ramucirumab showed similar overall safety profiles across subgroups, with a consistent median relative dose intensity ≥97.8%. A trend towards a delay in symptom deterioration in FHSI-8 with ramucirumab was observed in all subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: In this post-hoc analysis, ramucirumab showed a survival benefit across age subgroups with a tolerable safety profile, supporting its use in advanced HCC with elevated AFP, irrespective of age, including ≥75 years.

Malignant Peritoneal Tumors - Introduction.

This article provides an introduction to peritoneal tumors, which are the subject of a series of review papers published in Issue 5 (2019) of Klinicka onkologie. Many malignant peritoneal tumors are characterized by production of mucinous and gelatinous masses, multiple peritoneal disability, so-called peritoneal carcinomatosis, and various grades of malignancy depending on their origin, staging, and histological type. Malignant peritoneal tumors are rare and their clinical symptomatology is nonspecific and varies according to the extent of disability. Diagnosis, particularly in the initial asymptomatic stages, is very complicated and often impossible, and tumors are often diagnosed by chance during other operations. Malignant peritoneal tumors were regarded as incurable and lethal for a long time; however, this view has changed over the past three decades. The Sugarbaker method, a combination of cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy, was introduced in the 1990s. Postoperative cytostatic lavage is usually performed in specific cases. Classifications for the extent of disease and completeness of cytoreduction were established. Studies repeatedly confirmed the efficacy of this treatment for peritoneal malignancy. The combination of an aggressive surgical approach and intraperitoneal chemotherapy not only enhances quality of life, but also prolongs progression-free survival and overall survival in selected patients. Specialized centers for treatment of peritoneal malignancy were established based on results from the Czech Republic and around the world. These centers provide complex care, including specific surgical interventions and follow-up, for selected patients with primary and secondary peritoneal malignancy.

Therapy and Prophylaxis of Peritoneal Metastases from Colorectal Cancer.

Stage IV colorectal cancer is associated with high mortality, and the prognosis is significantly worse for patients have peritoneal metastases. Peritoneal carcinomatosis from colorectal cancer was considered incurable with an infaust prognosis. Median survival of untreated patients is about 6 months and palliative systemic chemotherapy can prolonge this time up to 20 months. Patients with this disease were previously only surgically treated if they had severe clinical symptoms or complications. This view has changed dramatically over the past 15 years. Aggressive cytoreductive surgery in combination with intraperitoneal chemotherapy may prolong median survival for more than 40 months in selected patients. The Peritoneal Surface Oncology Group International (PSOGI), the international authority on the treatment of peritoneal tumors, recommends cytoreduction with intraperitoneal chemotherapy as the standard of care for selected patients with moderate-to-small volume peritoneal metastases secondary to colorectal cancer. Macroscopic cytoreduction appears to be essential; however, the role of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy and the optimal chemotherapeutic agent for intraperitoneal lavage to treat peritoneal metastases from colorectal cancer remain unclear. The results of ongoing and future clinical trials are eagerly awaited.

Pharmacogenomic analyses of sunitinib in patients with pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors.

Aim: Evaluate associations between clinical outcomes and SNPs in patients with well-differentiated pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors receiving sunitinib. Patients & methods: Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards models were used to analyze the association between SNPs and survival outcomes using data from a sunitinib Phase IV (genotyped, n = 56) study. Fisher's exact test was used to analyze objective response rate and genotype associations. Results: After multiplicity adjustment, progression-free and overall survivals were not significantly correlated with SNPs; however, a higher objective response rate was significantly associated with IL1B rs16944 G/A versus G/G (46.4 vs 4.5%; p = 0.001). Conclusion: IL1B SNPs may predict treatment response in patients with pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. VEGF pathway SNPs are potentially associated with survival outcomes.

Prospective Observational Cohort Study to Describe the Use of Panitumumab in Combination with Chemotherapy in Real-World Clinical Practice for Patients with Wild-Type RAS mCRC.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to better understand panitumumab use in real-life clinical practice in first- and second-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer in five European countries. METHODS: This is a combined analysis of two observational, non-interventional prospective cohort studies, one of which was conducted in Germany and France, the other in Bulgaria, Czech Republic, and Hungary. The studies observed patients with wild-type [Kirsten] rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog ([K]RAS/RAS) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), who had been treated with panitumumab in combination with fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) in the first line or with panitumumab combined with fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) in the second line following fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy. The planned duration of observation was 12 months from the first dose of panitumumab. RESULTS: A total of 332 patients treated with panitumumab + FOLFOX in the first line and 94 patients treated with panitumumab + FOLFIRI in the second line were analyzed. The median number of panitumumab infusions was 10.0 in first-line FOLFOX patients and 11.5 in second-line FOLFIRI patients; the median duration of panitumumab exposure was 5.7 and 6.9 months, respectively. The unadjusted overall response rate (complete or partial response) in patients with available post-baseline response assessment (n = 290) was 51.7% in first-line FOLFOX and 44.9% in second-line FOLFIRI patients. In the first-line setting, resectability was achieved in 9.3%. Reported hospitalizations were mostly cancer-related visits such as scheduled anticancer treatment administrations, tumor assessment visits, or interventions. The majority of adverse drug reactions were skin disorders, with 75.3% in first-line FOLFOX patients and 72.3% in second-line FOLFIRI patients. CONCLUSION: Overall, the study results show that treatment patterns, clinical efficacy, and the safety profile of panitumumab in routine clinical practice were comparable to those in randomized controlled trials. The relatively low skin toxicity rate could be attributed to increasing experience in managing panitumumab-associated rash and some degree of underreporting. FUNDING: Amgen.

Efficacy and Safety of Sunitinib in Patients with Well-Differentiated Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumours.

BACKGROUND: In a phase III study, sunitinib led to a significant increase in progression-free survival (PFS) versus placebo in patients with pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (panNETs). This study was a post-marketing commitment to support the phase III data. METHODS: In this ongoing, open-label, phase IV trial (NCT01525550), patients with progressive, advanced unresectable/metastatic, well-differentiated panNETs received continuous sunitinib 37.5 mg once daily. Eligibility criteria were similar to those of the phase III study. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed PFS per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours v1.0 (RECIST). Other endpoints included PFS per Choi criteria, overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: Sixty-one treatment-naive and 45 previously treated patients received sunitinib. By March 19, 2016, 82 (77%) patients had discontinued treatment, mainly due to disease progression. Median treatment duration was 11.7 months. Investigator-assessed median PFS per RECIST (95% confidence interval [CI]) was 13.2 months (10.9-16.7): 13.2 (7.4-16.8) and 13.0 (9.2-20.4) in treatment-naive and previously treated patients, respectively. ORR (95% CI) per RECIST was 24.5% (16.7-33.8) in the total population: 21.3% (11.9-33.7) in treatment-naive and 28.9% (16.4-44.3) in previously treated patients. Median OS, although not yet mature, was 37.8 months (95% CI, 33.0-not estimable). The most common treatment-related AEs were neutropenia (53.8%), diarrhoea (46.2%), and leukopenia (43.4%). CONCLUSIONS: This phase IV trial confirms sunitinib as an efficacious and safe treatment option in patients with advanced/metastatic, well-differentiated, unresectable panNETs, and supports the phase III study outcomes. AEs were consistent with the known safety profile of sunitinib.

Everolimus in Neuroendocrine Tumors of the Gastrointestinal Tract and Unknown Primary.

PURPOSE: The RADIANT-4 randomized phase 3 study demonstrated significant prolongation of median progression-free survival (PFS) with everolimus compared to placebo (11.0 [95% CI 9.2-13.3] vs. 3.9 [95% CI 3.6-7.4] months) in patients with advanced, progressive, nonfunctional gastrointestinal (GI) and lung neuroendocrine tumors (NET). This analysis specifically evaluated NET patients with GI and unknown primary origin. METHODS: Patients in the RADIANT-4 trial were randomized 2:1 to everolimus 10 mg/day or placebo. The effect of everolimus on PFS was evaluated in patients with NET of the GI tract or unknown primary site. RESULTS: Of the 302 patients enrolled, 175 had GI NET (everolimus, 118; placebo, 57) and 36 had unknown primary (everolimus, 23; placebo, 13). In the GI subset, the median PFS by central review was 13.1 months (95% CI 9.2-17.3) in the everolimus arm versus 5.4 months (95% CI 3.6-9.3) in the placebo arm; the hazard ratio (HR) was 0.56 (95% CI 0.37-0.84). In the unknown primary patients, the median PFS was 13.6 months (95% CI 4.1-not evaluable) for everolimus versus 7.5 months (95% CI 1.9-18.5) for placebo; the HR was 0.60 (95% CI 0.24-1.51). Everolimus efficacy was also demonstrated in both midgut and non-midgut populations; a 40-46% reduction in the risk of progression or death was reported for patients in the combined GI and unknown primary subgroup. Everolimus had a benefit regardless of prior somatostatin analog therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Everolimus showed a clinically meaningful PFS benefit in patients with advanced progressive nonfunctional NET of GI and unknown primary, consistent with the overall RADIANT-4 results, providing an effective new standard treatment option in this patient population and filling an unmet treatment need for these patients.

Everolimus in advanced, progressive, well-differentiated, non-functional neuroendocrine tumors: RADIANT-4 lung subgroup analysis.

In the phase III RADIANT-4 study, everolimus improved median progression-free survival (PFS) by 7.1 months in patients with advanced, progressive, well-differentiated (grade 1 or grade 2), non-functional lung or gastrointestinal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) vs placebo (hazard ratio, 0.48; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.35-0.67; P < .00001). This exploratory analysis reports the outcomes of the subgroup of patients with lung NETs. In RADIANT-4, patients were randomized (2:1) to everolimus 10 mg/d or placebo, both with best supportive care. This is a post hoc analysis of the lung subgroup with PFS, by central radiology review, as the primary endpoint; secondary endpoints included objective response rate and safety measures. Ninety of the 302 patients enrolled in the study had primary lung NET (everolimus, n = 63; placebo, n = 27). Median PFS (95% CI) by central review was 9.2 (6.8-10.9) months in the everolimus arm vs 3.6 (1.9-5.1) months in the placebo arm (hazard ratio, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.28-0.88). More patients who received everolimus (58%) experienced tumor shrinkage compared with placebo (13%). Most frequently reported (≥5% incidence) grade 3-4 drug-related adverse events (everolimus vs. placebo) included stomatitis (11% vs. 0%), hyperglycemia (10% vs. 0%), and any infections (8% vs. 0%). In patients with advanced, progressive, well-differentiated, non-functional lung NET, treatment with everolimus was associated with a median PFS improvement of 5.6 months, with a safety profile similar to that of the overall RADIANT-4 cohort. These results support the use of everolimus in patients with advanced, non-functional lung NET. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (no. NCT01524783).

Panitumumab use in metastatic colorectal cancer and patterns of RAS testing: results from a Europe-wide physician survey and medical records review.

BACKGROUND: In Europe, treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) with panitumumab requires prior confirmation of RAS wild-type mutation status. Two studies - a physician survey and a medical records review (MRR) - were conducted to evaluate the use of panitumumab and awareness among prescribing oncologists of the associated RAS testing requirements in clinical practice. METHODS: Both studies enrolled participants from nine European countries and were carried out in three consecutive rounds. Rounds 1 and 2 (2012-2013) examined KRAS (exon 2) testing only; the results have been published in full previously. Round 3 (2014-2015) examined full RAS testing (exons 2, 3, 4 of KRAS and NRAS) and was initiated following a change in prescribing guidelines, from requiring KRAS alone to requiring full RAS testing. For the physician survey, telephone interviews were conducted with oncologists who had prescribed panitumumab to patients with mCRC in the previous 6 months. For the MRR, oncologists were asked to provide anonymised clinical information, extracted from their patients' records. RESULTS: In Round 3, 152 oncologists and 131 patients' records were included in the physician survey and MRR, respectively. In Round 3 of the physician survey, 95.4% (n = 145) of participants correctly identified that panitumumab should only be prescribed in RAS wild-type mCRC compared with 99.0% (n = 298) of 301 participants in Rounds 1 and 2, responding to the same question about KRAS testing. In Round 3 of the MRR, 100% (n = 131) of patients included in the study had confirmed KRAS or RAS wild-type status prior to initiation of panitumumab compared with 97.7% (n = 299) of 306 patients in Rounds 1 and 2 (KRAS only). Of those patients in Round 3, 83.2% (n = 109) had been tested for RAS status and 16.8% (n = 22) had been tested for KRAS status only. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians' adherence to prescribing guidelines has remained high over time in Europe, despite the change in indication for panitumumab treatment, from KRAS to RAS wild-type mCRC. Additionally, this study demonstrates the uptake of full RAS testing among the majority of oncologists and pathologists.

Health-related quality of life for everolimus versus placebo in patients with advanced, non-functional, well-differentiated gastrointestinal or lung neuroendocrine tumours (RADIANT-4): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: In the phase 3 RADIANT-4 trial, everolimus increased progression-free survival compared with placebo in patients with advanced, progressive, non-functional, well-differentiated gastrointestinal or lung neuroendocrine tumours (NETs). We now report the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) secondary endpoint. METHODS: RADIANT-4 is a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial done in 97 centres in 25 countries worldwide. Adults (aged ≥18 years) were eligible for the study if they had pathologically confirmed, advanced (unresectable or metastatic), non-functional, well-differentiated (grade 1 or 2) NETs of lung or gastrointestinal origin. Patients were randomly allocated (2:1) using block randomisation (block size of three) by an interactive voice response system to receive oral everolimus (10 mg per day) or placebo, both with best supportive care, with stratification by tumour origin, WHO performance status, and previous somatostatin analogue treatment. HRQOL was assessed with the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) questionnaire at baseline (visit 2, day 1), every 8 weeks (±â€ˆ1 week) during the study for the first 12 months after randomisation, and every 12 weeks thereafter until study drug discontinuation. The primary endpoint, reported previously, was progression-free survival assessed by central review; HRQOL was a prespecified secondary endpoint. The prespecified secondary outcome measure was time to definitive deterioration (≥7 points) in FACT-G total score. Analyses were done on the full analysis set, consisting of all randomised patients, by intention to treat. Only data obtained while receiving the randomly allocated treatment were included in this analysis. Enrolment for RADIANT-4 was completed on Aug 23, 2013, but the trial is ongoing pending final analysis of the key secondary endpoint of overall survival. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01524783. FINDINGS: Between April 3, 2012, and Aug 23, 2013, 302 patients were enrolled; 205 were randomly allocated everolimus and 97 were assigned placebo. At baseline, 193 (94%) of 205 patients assigned everolimus and 95 (98%) of 97 allocated placebo had completed either fully or partly the FACT-G questionnaire; at week 48, 70 (83%) of 84 patients assigned everolimus and 22 (85%) of 26 allocated placebo completed FACT-G. Median time to definitive deterioration in FACT-G total score was 11·27 months (95% CI 9·27-19·35) with everolimus and 9·23 months (5·52-not estimable) with placebo (adjusted hazard ratio 0·81, 95% CI 0·55-1·21; log-rank p=0·31). INTERPRETATION: HRQOL was maintained for patients with advanced, non-functional, gastrointestinal or lung NETs, with no relevant differences noted between the everolimus and placebo groups. In view of the previous RADIANT-4 findings of longer progression-free survival with everolimus, our findings suggest that everolimus delays disease progression while preserving overall HRQOL, even with the usual toxic effects related to active targeted drug treatment for cancer. FUNDING: Novartis Pharmaceuticals.

Prognostic Factor Analysis of Overall Survival in Gastric Cancer from Two Phase III Studies of Second-line Ramucirumab (REGARD and RAINBOW) Using Pooled Patient Data.

PURPOSE: To identify baseline prognostic factors for survival in patients with disease progression, during or after chemotherapy for the treatment of advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We pooled data from patients randomized between 2009 and 2012 in 2 phase III, global double-blind studies of ramucirumab for the treatment of advanced gastric or GEJ adenocarcinoma following disease progression on first-line platinum- and/or fluoropyrimidine-containing therapy (REGARD and RAINBOW). Forty-one key baseline clinical and laboratory factors common in both studies were examined. Model building started with covariate screening using univariate Cox models (significance level=0.05). A stepwise multivariable Cox model identified the final prognostic factors (entry+exit significance level=0.01). Cox models were stratified by treatment and geographic region. The process was repeated to identify baseline prognostic quality of life (QoL) parameters. RESULTS: Of 1,020 randomized patients, 953 (93%) patients without any missing covariates were included in the analysis. We identified 12 independent prognostic factors of poor survival: 1) peritoneal metastases; 2) Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance score 1; 3) the presence of a primary tumor; 4) time to progression since prior therapy <6 months; 5) poor/unknown tumor differentiation; abnormally low blood levels of 6) albumin, 7) sodium, and/or 8) lymphocytes; and abnormally high blood levels of 9) neutrophils, 10) aspartate aminotransferase (AST), 11) alkaline phosphatase (ALP), and/or 12) lactate dehydrogenase (LDH). Factors were used to devise a 4-tier prognostic index (median overall survival [OS] by risk [months]: high=3.4, moderate=6.4, medium=9.9, and low=14.5; Harrell's C-index=0.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64-0.68). Addition of QoL to the model identified patient-reported appetite loss as an independent prognostic factor. CONCLUSIONS: The identified prognostic factors and the reported prognostic index may help clinical decision-making, patient stratification, and planning of future clinical studies.

Exposure-Response Analyses of Ramucirumab from Two Randomized, Phase III Trials of Second-line Treatment for Advanced Gastric or Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer.

Ramucirumab is an IgG1 monoclonal antibody specific for the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2. Ramucirumab, 8 mg/kg every 2 weeks, administered as monotherapy (REGARD) or in combination with paclitaxel (RAINBOW), was safe and effective in patients with previously treated advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer. We evaluated exposure-efficacy and exposure-safety relationships of ramucirumab from two randomized, placebo-controlled phase III trials. Sparse pharmacokinetic samples were collected, and a population pharmacokinetic analysis was conducted to predict ramucirumab minimum trough concentration at steady state (Cmin,ss). Kaplan-Meier methods and Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate the ramucirumab exposure (Cmin,ss)-efficacy relationship to overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Logistic regression analyses were used to evaluate exposure-safety relationships. Analyses included 321 ramucirumab + paclitaxel and 335 placebo + paclitaxel patients from RAINBOW and 72 ramucirumab and 35 placebo patients from REGARD. Exposure-efficacy analysis showed ramucirumab Cmin,ss was a significant predictor of OS and PFS in both trials. Higher ramucirumab exposure was associated with longer OS and PFS. In RAINBOW, grade ≥3 hypertension, leukopenia, and neutropenia, but not febrile neutropenia, significantly correlated with Cmin,ss, with increased exposure leading to increased incidence. Exploratory exposure-response analyses suggest a positive relationship between efficacy and ramucirumab exposure with manageable toxicities at exposures generated from a dose of 8 mg/kg ramucirumab given every 2 weeks for patients with advanced gastric/GEJ cancer. These findings suggest an opportunity to further optimize benefit versus risk profiles of ramucirumab treatment in patients with gastric/GEJ cancer. Mol Cancer Ther; 16(10); 2215-22. ©2017 AACR.

Regorafenib in the Real-Life Clinical Practice: Data from the Czech Registry.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the use of regorafenib for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in clinical practice in the Czech Republic, and to describe the clinical outcomes of patients in terms of safety and survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The data of patients treated with regorafenib were extracted from the national CORECT registry. The CORECT registry is a non-interventional post-marketing database, gathering information about patients with CRC and treated with targeted agents. Twenty oncology centres in the Czech Republic contributed to this registry. Collected data included patients' characteristics, disease history, cancer treatments, response to treatments and safety. RESULTS: A total of 148 patients treated with regorafenib in clinical practice were analysed. At regorafenib initiation, almost all patients were fully active or slightly restricted in physical activity. Regorafenib was not administered as first-line treatment in any patient. Median progression-free survival was 3.5 months and median overall survival was 9.3 months. One-year survival rate was 44.6 %. Four partial responses were observed and 51 stable diseases. Progression was observed in 66 patients (44.6 %). The main reported adverse events were skin toxicity (5.4 %) and fatigue (2.0 %). CONCLUSIONS: Regorafenib is a well-established treatment for pretreated patients with mCRC, however real-life data are scarce. Our results demonstrated slightly better efficacy of regorafenib and better safety profile in patients with mCRC compared to the randomised trials.

Biomarker analyses in REGARD gastric/GEJ carcinoma patients treated with VEGFR2-targeted antibody ramucirumab.

BACKGROUND: Angiogenesis inhibition is an important strategy for cancer treatment. Ramucirumab, a human IgG1 monoclonal antibody that targets VEGF receptor 2 (VEGFR2), inhibits VEGF-A, -C, -D binding and endothelial cell proliferation. To attempt to identify prognostic and predictive biomarkers, retrospective analyses were used to assess tumour (HER2, VEGFR2) and serum (VEGF-C and -D, and soluble (s) VEGFR1 and 3) biomarkers in phase 3 REGARD patients with metastatic gastric/gastroesophageal junction carcinoma. METHODS: A total of 152 out of 355 (43%) patients randomised to ramucirumab or placebo had ⩾1 evaluable biomarker result using VEGFR2 immunohistochemistry or HER2, immunohistochemistry or FISH, of blinded baseline tumour tissue samples. Serum samples (32 patients, 9%) were assayed for VEGF-C and -D, and sVEGFR1 and 3. RESULTS: None of the biomarkers tested were associated with ramucirumab efficacy at a level of statistical significance. High VEGFR2 endothelial expression was associated with a non-significant prognostic trend toward shorter progression-free survival (high vs low HR=1.65, 95% CI=0.84,3.23). Treatment with ramucirumab was associated with a trend toward improved survival in both high (HR=0.69, 95% CI=0.38, 1.22) and low (HR=0.73, 95% CI=0.42, 1.26) VEGFR2 subgroups. The benefit associated with ramucirumab did not appear to differ by tumoural HER2 expression. CONCLUSIONS: REGARD exploratory analyses did not identify a strong potentially predictive biomarker of ramucirumab efficacy; however, statistical power was limited.

Everolimus for the treatment of advanced, non-functional neuroendocrine tumours of the lung or gastrointestinal tract (RADIANT-4): a randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Effective systemic therapies for patients with advanced, progressive neuroendocrine tumours of the lung or gastrointestinal tract are scarce. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of everolimus compared with placebo in this patient population. METHODS: In the randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 RADIANT-4 trial, adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with advanced, progressive, well-differentiated, non-functional neuroendocrine tumours of lung or gastrointestinal origin were enrolled from 97 centres in 25 countries worldwide. Eligible patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio by an interactive voice response system to receive everolimus 10 mg per day orally or identical placebo, both with supportive care. Patients were stratified by tumour origin, performance status, and previous somatostatin analogue treatment. Patients, investigators, and the study sponsor were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival assessed by central radiology review, analysed by intention to treat. Overall survival was a key secondary endpoint. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01524783. FINDINGS: Between April 3, 2012, and Aug 23, 2013, a total of 302 patients were enrolled, of whom 205 were allocated to everolimus 10 mg per day and 97 to placebo. Median progression-free survival was 11·0 months (95% CI 9·2-13·3) in the everolimus group and 3·9 months (3·6-7·4) in the placebo group. Everolimus was associated with a 52% reduction in the estimated risk of progression or death (hazard ratio [HR] 0·48 [95% CI 0·35-0·67], p<0·00001). Although not statistically significant, the results of the first pre-planned interim overall survival analysis indicated that everolimus might be associated with a reduction in the risk of death (HR 0·64 [95% CI 0·40-1·05], one-sided p=0·037, whereas the boundary for statistical significance was 0·0002). Grade 3 or 4 drug-related adverse events were infrequent and included stomatitis (in 18 [9%] of 202 patients in the everolimus group vs 0 of 98 in the placebo group), diarrhoea (15 [7%] vs 2 [2%]), infections (14 [7%] vs 0), anaemia (8 [4%] vs 1 [1%]), fatigue (7 [3%] vs 1 [1%]), and hyperglycaemia (7 [3%] vs 0). INTERPRETATION: Treatment with everolimus was associated with significant improvement in progression-free survival in patients with progressive lung or gastrointestinal neuroendocrine tumours. The safety findings were consistent with the known side-effect profile of everolimus. Everolimus is the first targeted agent to show robust anti-tumour activity with acceptable tolerability across a broad range of neuroendocrine tumours, including those arising from the pancreas, lung, and gastrointestinal tract. FUNDING: Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation.

Panitumumab Use in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer and Patterns of KRAS Testing: Results from a Europe-Wide Physician Survey and Medical Records Review.

BACKGROUND: From 2008-2013, the European indication for panitumumab required that patients' tumor KRAS exon 2 mutation status was known prior to starting treatment. To evaluate physician awareness of panitumumab prescribing information and how physicians prescribe panitumumab in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), two European multi-country, cross-sectional, observational studies were initiated in 2012: a physician survey and a medical records review. The first two out of three planned rounds for each study are reported. METHODS: The primary objective in the physician survey was to estimate the prevalence of KRAS testing, and in the medical records review, it was to evaluate the effect of test results on patterns of panitumumab use. The medical records review study also included a pathologists' survey. RESULTS: In the physician survey, nearly all oncologists (299/301) were aware of the correct panitumumab indication and the need to test patients' tumor KRAS status before treatment with panitumumab. Nearly all oncologists (283/301) had in the past 6 months of clinical practice administered panitumumab correctly to mCRC patients with wild-type KRAS status. In the medical records review, 97.5% of participating oncologists (77/79) conducted a KRAS test for all of their patients prior to prescribing panitumumab. Four patients (1.3%) did not have tumor KRAS mutation status tested prior to starting panitumumab treatment. Approximately one-quarter of patients (85/306) were treated with panitumumab and concurrent oxaliplatin-containing chemotherapy; of these, 83/85 had confirmed wild-type KRAS status prior to starting panitumumab treatment. All 56 referred laboratories that participated used a Conformité Européenne-marked or otherwise validated KRAS detection method, and nearly all (55/56) participated in a quality assurance scheme. CONCLUSIONS: There was a high level of knowledge amongst oncologists around panitumumab prescribing information and the need to test and confirm patients' tumors as being wild-type KRAS prior to treatment with panitumumab, with or without concurrent oxaliplatin-containing therapy.

Lenvatinib, everolimus, and the combination in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma: a randomised, phase 2, open-label, multicentre trial.

BACKGROUND: Currently, metastatic renal cell carcinoma is treated with sequential single agents targeting VEGF or mTOR. Here, we aimed to assess lenvatinib, everolimus, or their combination as second-line treatment in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. METHODS: We did a randomised, phase 2, open-label, multicentre trial at 37 centres in five countries and enrolled patients with advanced or metastatic, clear-cell, renal cell carcinoma. We included patients who had received treatment with a VEGF-targeted therapy and progressed on or within 9 months of stopping that agent. Patients were randomised via an interactive voice response system in a 1:1:1 ratio to either lenvatinib (24 mg/day), everolimus (10 mg/day), or lenvatinib plus everolimus (18 mg/day and 5 mg/day, respectively) administered orally in continuous 28-day cycles until disease progression or unacceptable toxic effects. The randomisation procedure dynamically minimised imbalances between treatment groups for the stratification factors haemoglobin and corrected serum calcium. The primary objective was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. This study is closed to enrolment but patients' treatment and follow-up is ongoing. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01136733. FINDINGS: Between March 16, 2012, and June 19, 2013, 153 patients were randomly allocated to receive either the combination of lenvatinib plus everolimus (n=51), single-agent lenvatinib (n=52), or single-agent everolimus (n=50). Lenvatinib plus everolimus significantly prolonged progression-free survival compared with everolimus alone (median 14·6 months [95% CI 5·9-20·1] vs 5·5 months [3·5-7·1]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·40, 95% CI 0·24-0·68; p=0·0005), but not compared with lenvatinib alone (7·4 months [95% CI 5·6-10·2]; HR 0·66, 95% CI 0·30-1·10; p=0·12). Single-agent lenvatinib significantly prolonged progression-free survival compared with everolimus alone (HR 0·61, 95% CI 0·38-0·98; p=0·048). Grade 3 and 4 events occurred in fewer patients allocated single-agent everolimus (25 [50%]) compared with those assigned lenvatinib alone (41 [79%]) or lenvatinib plus everolimus (36 [71%]). The most common grade 3 or 4 treatment-emergent adverse event in patients allocated lenvatinib plus everolimus was diarrhoea (ten [20%]), in those assigned single-agent lenvatinib it was proteinuria (ten [19%]), and in those assigned single-agent everolimus it was anaemia (six [12%]). Two deaths were deemed related to study drug, one cerebral haemorrhage in the lenvatinib plus everolimus group and one myocardial infarction with single-agent lenvatinib. INTERPRETATION: Lenvatinib plus everolimus and lenvatinib alone resulted in a progression-free survival benefit for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma who have progressed after one previous VEGF-targeted therapy. Further study of lenvatinib is warranted in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. FUNDING: Eisai Inc.