Erlotinib, cabozantinib, or erlotinib plus cabozantinib as second-line or third-line treatment of patients with EGFR wild-type advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (ECOG-ACRIN 1512): a randomised, controlled, open-label, multicentre, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Erlotinib is approved for the treatment of all patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but is most active in the treatment of EGFR mutant NSCLC. Cabozantinib, a small molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitor, targets MET, VEGFR, RET, ROS1, and AXL, which are implicated in lung cancer tumorigenesis. We compared the efficacy of cabozantinib alone or in combination with erlotinib versus erlotinib alone in patients with EGFR wild-type NSCLC. METHODS: This three group, randomised, controlled, open-label, multicentre, phase 2 trial was done in 37 academic and community oncology practices in the USA. Patients were eligible if they had received one or two previous treatments for advanced non-squamous, EGFR wild-type, NSCLC. Patients were stratified by performance status and line of therapy, and randomly assigned using permuted blocks within strata to receive open-label oral daily dosing of erlotinib (150 mg), cabozantinib (60 mg), or erlotinib (150 mg) and cabozantinib (40 mg). Imaging was done every 8 weeks. At the time of radiographic progression, there was optional crossover for patients in either single-drug group to receive combination treatment. The primary endpoint was to compare progression-free survival in patients given erlotinib alone versus cabozantinib alone, and in patients given erlotinib alone versus the combination of erlotinib plus cabozantinib. We assessed the primary endpoint in the per-protocol population, which was defined as all patients who were eligible, randomly assigned, and received at least one dose of treatment. The safety analysis population included all patients who received study treatment irrespective of eligibility. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01708954. FINDINGS: Between Feb 7, 2013, and July 1, 2014, we enrolled and randomly assigned 42 patients to erlotinib treatment, 40 patients to cabozantinib treatment, and 43 patients to erlotinib plus cabozantinib treatment, of whom 111 (89%) in total were included in the primary analysis (erlotinib [n=38], cabozantinib [n=38], erlotinib plus cabozantinib [n=35]). Compared with erlotinib alone (median 1·8 months [95% CI 1·7-2·2]), progression-free survival was significantly improved in the cabozantinib group (4·3 months [3·6-7·4]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·39, 80% CI 0·27-0·55; one-sided p=0·0003) and in the erlotinib plus cabozantinib group (4·7 months [2·4-7·4]; HR 0·37, 0·25-0·53; one-sided p=0·0003). Among participants included in the safety analysis of the erlotinib (n=40), cabozantinib (n=40), and erlotinib plus cabozantinib (n=39) groups, the most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were diarrhoea (three [8%] cases in the erlotinib group vs three [8%] in the cabozantinib group vs 11 [28%] in the erlotinib plus cabozantinib group), hypertension (none vs ten [25%] vs one [3%]), fatigue (five [13%] vs six [15%] vs six [15%]), oral mucositis (none vs four [10%] vs one [3%]), and thromboembolic event (none vs three [8%] vs two [5%]). One death due to respiratory failure occurred in the cabozantinib group, deemed possibly related to either drug, and one death due to pneumonitis occurred in the erlotinib plus cabozantinib group, deemed related to either drug or the combination. INTERPRETATION: Despite its small sample size, this trial showed that, in patients with EGFR wild-type NSCLC, cabozantinib alone or combined with erlotinib has clinically meaningful, superior efficacy to that of erlotinib alone, with additional toxicity that was generally manageable. Cabozantinib-based regimens are promising for further investigation in this patient population. FUNDING: ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group, National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health.

Assessing patient-reported peripheral neuropathy: the reliability and validity of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-CIPN20 Questionnaire.

PURPOSE: This clinimetric analysis was conducted to evaluate the reliability, validity, and responsiveness to changeover time of the QLQ-CIPN20 when used to quantify patient-reported chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN). METHODS: Participants recruited to four cooperative group trials were pooled to create two groups (n = 376, 575): those who did versus did not receive neurotoxic chemotherapy. QLQ-CIPN20 internal consistency reliability was assessed using Cronbach's alpha coefficients. Instrument validity was assessed using factor analysis, by evaluating score correlations with other CIPN and pain measures, and by comparing scores between contrasting groups. Cohen's d was used to assess responsiveness to change. RESULTS: Alpha coefficients for the sensory, motor, and autonomic scales were 0.88, 0.88, and 0.78, respectively. However, autonomic scale and hearing loss items exhibited low item-item correlations (r ≤ 0.30) and thus were deleted. Moderate correlations were found between QLQ-CIPN20 and Brief Pain Inventory pain severity items (r 0.30-0.57, p ≤ .0001). Correlation between the QLQ-CIPN20 sensory and toxicity grading scale scores was low (r = .20; p ≤ .01). Mean scores were higher (worse) (p ≤ 0.0001) in individuals who did versus did not receive neurotoxic chemotherapy. The sensory and motor scales exhibited moderate-high responsiveness to change (Cohen's d = 0.82 and 0.48, respectively). Factor analysis indicated that the 16-item version formed distinct factors for lower and upper extremity CIPN, delineating typical distal to proximal CIPN progression. CONCLUSIONS: Results provide support for QLQ-CIPN20 sensory and motor scale reliability and validity. The more parsimonious and clinically relevant 16-item version merits further consideration.

Implementation of a standardized approach to borderline resectable pancreatic cancer in a multisite community oncology program.

BACKGROUND: Treatment paradigms for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer are evolving with increasing use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and neoadjuvant chemoradiation. Variations in the definition of borderline resectable pancreatic cancer and neoadjuvant approaches have made standardizing care for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer difficult. We report an effort to standardize management of borderline resectable pancreatic cancer throughout Sanford Health, a large community oncology network. METHODS: Starting in October 2013, cases of pancreatic adenocarcinoma without known metastatic disease were categorized as borderline resectable pancreatic cancer if they met ≥ 1 of the following criteria: (1) abutment of superior mesenteric, common hepatic, or celiac arteries with < 180° involvement, (2) venous involvement deemed potentially suitable for reconstruction, and/or (3) biopsy-proven lymph node involvement. Patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer were treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by reimaging and surgery if venous involvement had improved; if disease remained borderline resectable, patients underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiation and surgical exploration as long as reimaging did not reveal evidence of progressive disease. RESULTS: Forty-three patients from October 2013 to April 2017 were diagnosed with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. Twelve of 42 (29%) patients proceeded to surgical exploration directly after neoadjuvant chemotherapy; 23 (55%) received neoadjuvant chemoradiation. Overall, 28/43 (65%) underwent exploration with 19 (44%) able to undergo resection. Of those, 14/19 (74%) attained R0 resection and 11/19 (58%) were pathologic N0. No pretreatment or treatment variables were associated with resection rates; resection was the only variable associated with survival. CONCLUSION: This report demonstrates the feasibility of implementing a standardized approach to borderline resectable pancreatic cancer across multiple sites over a wide geographic area. Adherence to protocol therapies was good and surgical outcomes are similar to many reported series.

Delivering Precision Oncology in a Community Cancer Program: Results From a Prospective Observational Study.

INTRODUCTION: Precision oncology (PO) is a growing treatment approach in the era of next-generation sequencing (NGS) and matched therapies. Effective delivery of PO in the community has not been extensively studied. Our program developed a virtual molecular tumor board (MTB) strategy to help guide PO care. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Over 18 months, eligible adult patients with advanced, incurable solid tumor malignancies were enrolled in a molecular profiling (MP) study using the Foundation Medicine NGS panel. Results were reviewed through a weekly, videoconferenced MTB conducted across our largely rural integrated health system. Recommendations from the MTB were used to identify actionable alterations (AAs). Feasibility of PO care delivery was assessed as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included the frequency of AAs, genomic matched treatments, genomic matched clinical trial enrollment, and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 120 participants with a variety of advanced tumor types were enrolled. Of these, 109 (90.8%) had successful MP. Treatment on the basis of an AA was recommended by the MTB in 58% of patients (63 of 109) who had a successful MP result. For those completing MP, treatments included enrollment in a genomic matched clinical trial (n = 16; 14.6%) and genomic matched treatment with a Food and Drug Administration-approved agent (n = 23; 21.1%). Response and survival data were similar regardless of the matched treatment option chosen. CONCLUSION: A video-conferenced MTB-facilitated NGS testing and treatment delivery system was implemented in our integrated community oncology program. Continued use of this model aims to increase understanding of the impact of PO in this setting.

Effect of diabetes mellitus on the epidemiology and outcomes of colon cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the effect of diabetes mellitus (DM) on the pathogenesis and outcomes from colon cancer. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted on 1853 patients with colon cancer. RESULTS: A higher percentage of males than females with colon cancer had DM (16.2% vs 11.3%; p < 0.01). Males had a slightly lower risk of dying from colon cancer (RR - 0.88; p=0.08). There was no difference in the median age of diagnosis of colon cancer in patients with and without DM, but a larger proportion of patients with diabetes mellitus were >or=70 yr at diagnosis (50% vs 43%) (p=0.0004). No significant relationship was noted between stage of colon cancer or survival and presence of DM. CONCLUSIONS: DM did not affect either the stage at diagnosis, or outcomes from colon cancer. More males with colon cancer tended to have DM and a larger proportion of patients with DM were >or=70 yr at the time of diagnosis.

Gemcitabine and ISIS-2503 for patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a North Central Cancer Treatment Group phase II trial.

PURPOSE: Gemcitabine remains the standard therapy for metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (ACA), but has limited activity. ISIS-2503 is an antisense compound directed against H-ras with preclinical activity against pancreatic ACA in tumor models. The combination of ISIS-2503 and gemcitabine has been evaluated in a prior phase I study. METHODS: Patients with metastatic or locally advanced pancreatic ACA not amenable to surgery or local radiation received gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) intravenously over 30 minutes on days 1 and 8 and ISIS-2503 6 mg/kg/d as a continuous intravenous infusion over 14 days of an every-3-weeks cycle. Responses were monitored by radiologic imaging every 6 weeks. RESULTS: Forty-eight eligible patients were enrolled, 43 with metastatic disease. Median follow-up was 12.6 months (range, 2.2 to 16.8 months) for living patients. A median of four cycles of treatment was given (range, 1 to 18 cycles). All patients were assessable for response and toxicity. The 6-month survival percentage was 57.5% (95% CI, 44.9% to 73.5%) and the median survival was 6.6 months. The response rate was 10.4% (one complete response, four partial responses). Clinically significant toxicity was limited except for one fatal pulmonary embolism. CONCLUSION: This study shows a promising response rate to the combination of gemcitabine and ISIS-2503 in patients with pancreatic ACA. The observed 6-month survival rate in these patients met our protocol-defined criteria for success. This regimen is tolerable, but is of unclear benefit. Additional studies evaluating the role of gemcitabine and ISIS-2503 in the treatment of pancreatic ACA should be considered.

A phase II trial of the Src-kinase inhibitor saracatinib after four cycles of chemotherapy for patients with extensive stage small cell lung cancer: NCCTG trial N-0621.

INTRODUCTION: To assess the efficacy and the Src-kinase inhibitor saracatinib (AZD-0530) after four cycles of platinum-based chemotherapy for extensive stage small cell lung cancer (SCLC). METHODS: Patients with at least stable disease received saracatinib at a dose of 175 mg/day by mouth until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or patient refusal. The primary endpoint was the 12-week progression-free survival (PFS) rate from initiation of saracatinib treatment. Planned interim analysis in first 20 patients, where 13 or more patients alive and progression-free at 12-weeks would allow continued enrollment to 40 total patients. RESULTS: All 23 evaluable patients received platinum based standard chemotherapy. Median age was 58 years (range: 48-82). 96% of patients had a performance status of 0/1. Median of two cycles given (range: 1-34). All 23 (100%) patients have ended treatment, most for disease progression (19/23). The 12-week PFS rate was 26% (6/23; 95% CI: 10-48%). From start of standard chemotherapy, median PFS was 4.7 months (95% CI: 4.5-5.1) and median OS was 11.2 months (95% CI: 9.9-13.8). Eight (35%) and three (13%) patients experienced at least one grade 3/4 or grade 4 AE, respectively. Commonly occurring grade 3/4 adverse events were thrombocytopenia (13%), fatigue (9%), nausea (9%), and vomiting (9%). CONCLUSIONS: Saracatinib at a dose of 175 mg/day by mouth is well tolerated. However, the PFS rate observed at the pre-planned interim analysis did not meet the criteria for additional enrollment.

Gemcitabine and irinotecan as first-line therapy for carcinoma of unknown primary: results of a multicenter phase II trial.

UNLABELLED: Metastatic carcinoma of unknown primary (CUP) has a very poor prognosis, and no standard first-line therapy currently exists. Here, we report the results of a phase II study utilizing a combination of gemcitabine and irinotecan as first-line therapy. Treatment was with gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) and irinotecan 75 mg/m(2) weekly times four on a six week cycle (Cohort I). Due to excessive toxicity, the dose and schedule were modified as follows: gemcitabine 750 mg/m(2) and irinotecan 75 mg/m(2) given weekly times three on a four week cycle (Cohort II). The primary endpoint was the confirmed response rate (CR + PR). Secondary endpoints consisted of adverse events based upon the presence or absence of the UDP glucuronosyltransferase 1 family, polypeptide A1*28 (UGT1A1*28) polymorphism, time to progression, and overall survival. Thirty-one patients were enrolled with a median age of 63 (range: 38-94), and 26 patients were evaluable for efficacy. Significant toxicity was observed in Cohort 1, characterized by 50% (7/14) patients experiencing a grade 4+ adverse event, but not in cohort II. The confirmed response rate including patients from both cohorts was 12% (95% CI: 2-30%), which did not meet the criteria for continued enrollment. Overall median survival was 7.2 months (95% CI: 4.0 to 11.6) for the entire cohort but notably longer in cohort II than in cohort I (9.3 months (95% CI: 4.1 to 12.1) versus 4.0 months (95% CI: 2.2 to 15.6)). Gemcitabine and irinotecan is not an active combination when used as first line therapy in patients with metastatic carcinoma of unknown primary. Efforts into developing novel diagnostic and therapeutic approaches remain important for improving the outlook for this heterogeneous group of patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00066781.

Hepatic arterial infusion and systemic chemotherapy after multiple metastasectomy in patients with colorectal carcinoma metastatic to the liver: a North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) phase II study, 92-46-52.

BACKGROUND: Patients with multiple liver metastases from colorectal cancer are at high risk of recurrence after resection. Hepatic artery infusion (HAI) alternating with systemic therapy after surgical resection may improve survival after surgery. METHODS: Patients with liver-only metastases from colorectal cancer amenable to resection/cryoablation were eligible. Previous adjuvant chemotherapy for a completely resected primary tumor was allowed. Alternating courses of HAI and systemic therapy included floxuridine (FUDR) by HAI. Systemic chemotherapy consisted of bolus leucovorin (LV) plus 5-fluorouracil (5-FU). RESULTS: Forty-nine patients had complete resection of their liver metastases, with 44% having more than 4 hepatic metastases and 78% having bilobar disease. Thirty-six patients had HAI FUDR alternating with systemic therapy. Patients received a median of 3.5 cycles (range, 1-4) and 3 cycles (range, 0-6) of therapy with HAI FUDR and systemic therapy, respectively. At the time of final analysis the estimated median disease-free survival and hepatic disease-free survival was 1.2 years (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.9-2.1) and 1.8 years (95% CI, 1.8-not available), respectively. Eleven patients (31%) were alive at this writing. All surviving patients had a minimum of 5.5 years of follow-up. CONCLUSION: This trial of adjuvant chemotherapy in patients who underwent complete resection with unfavorable characteristics demonstrates apparent improvement in outcome compared with historical series treated with surgery alone. However the results of this trial and other randomized trials of HAI do not appear to support its use at this time because of the development of more effective systemic options.

A phase III, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial of flaxseed for the treatment of hot flashes: North Central Cancer Treatment Group N08C7.

OBJECTIVE: Preliminary data suggest that flaxseed, a rich source of dietary lignans, may be a potentially effective treatment of hot flashes. A phase III, randomized, placebo, controlled trial was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of flaxseed in reducing hot flashes. METHODS: Postmenopausal women with or without breast cancer were randomly assigned to a flaxseed bar (providing 410 mg of lignans) for 6 weeks versus a placebo bar. Participants completed daily, prospective, hot flash diaries during the baseline week, and then ate one study bar per day for 6 weeks while recording their daily hot flashes. The intraparticipant difference in hot flash activity between baseline and the last treatment week was the primary endpoint. Adverse effects were evaluated through a self-report and the Common Terminology Criteria assessment. RESULTS: A total of 188 women were enrolled in this trial. The mean hot flash score was reduced 4.9 in the flaxseed group and 3.5 in the placebo group (P = 0.29). In both groups, slightly more than a third of the women received a 50% reduction in their hot flash score. Only one adverse effect was significantly different between groups, grade 1 pruritus, which was more common in the placebo group (8% vs 1%). Both groups reported abdominal distension, flatulence, diarrhea, and nausea. Adherence and ability to detect treatment assignment did not differ between groups. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this trial do not support the use of 410 mg of lignans for the reduction of hot flashes. The bars were fairly well tolerated, with both groups reporting gastrointestinal effects, probably due to the fiber content.

Phase 2 trial of pemetrexed disodium and carboplatin in previously untreated extensive-stage small cell lung cancer, N0423.

BACKGROUND: In extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (SCLC), the combination of pemetrexed plus carboplatin has shown activity and appeared to be well-tolerated. We conducted a trial to confirm the efficacy and to assess the tolerability of this chemotherapy combination. METHODS: Patients with untreated extensive-stage SCLC were enrolled in this phase 2 open-labeled study. They receive pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2) and carboplatin (area under the curve of 5) every 21 days for a maximum 6 cycles. The primary endpoint for this trial was the confirmed response rate and the accrual goal was 70 patients. RESULTS: Forty-six eligible patients (29 aged <70 years, 17 aged >or=70 years) were accrued to this study. The efficacy outcomes were similar between the 2 age groups. Overall, the confirmed response rate was 35% (16 of 46; 95% confidence interval [CI], 21%-50%), where all 16 were partial responses. On the basis of these results, we had strong evidence that the study would not meet the preset efficacy criteria and was, therefore, closed before full accrual. The median duration of response was 4.4 months (95% CI, 2.9-5.2). Median overall survival for patients aged <70 years and aged >or=70 years was 9.2 months (95% CI, 5.4-11.6) and 10.8 months (95% CI, 2.2-14.3), respectively. Grade 3 or higher toxicity rates were similar between the younger and older patients. Grade 3/4 and grade 4 hematological toxicities were observed in 46% and 26% of patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Although well-tolerated, the combination of pemetrexed and carboplatin is not as effective as standard therapy in patients with untreated extensive-stage SCLC.

A front-line window of opportunity phase 2 study of sorafenib in patients with advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer: North Central Cancer Treatment Group Study N0326.

BACKGROUND: The current study was conducted to assess the efficacy and toxicity of sorafenib as front-line therapy in patients with stage IIIB (pleural effusion) or IV nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: Patients received sorafenib 400 mg twice daily by mouth continuously, and were evaluated every 2 weeks during the first 8 weeks. Patients who manifested clinical progression during this period proceeded to receive standard of care. The primary endpoint was confirmed objective tumor response. A 2-stage Fleming design was used such that if at most 1 confirmed partial response (PR) or complete response was observed in the first 20 patients (stage 1), the treatment would be considered ineffective, and further enrollment would be discontinued. RESULTS: Only 1 PR was observed in the first 20 patients. By the time of study closure, 5 additional patients who were already being screened for study inclusion were enrolled. Of the 25 patients (15 women, 10 men; 4 stage IIIB, 21 stage IV; median age, 67 years [range, 45-85 years]), there were 3 (12%) PRs and 6 (24%) cases with stable disease observed. The median time-to-progression and progression-free survival was 2.8 months. Seven (28%) patients remained progression-free at 24 weeks. No grade 3 or higher hematologic adverse events were observed. Thirteen (52%) patients had a grade 3 nonhematologic adverse event, with fatigue (20%), diarrhea (8%), and dyspnea (8%) being the most common. CONCLUSIONS: Sorafenib is not effective as front-line therapy in the general unselected NSCLC population. The window of opportunity design is feasible for estimating the activity of novel compounds.

Patient assessment of bowel function during and after pelvic radiotherapy: results of a prospective phase III North Central Cancer Treatment Group clinical trial.

PURPOSE: To evaluate patient assessment of long-term effect of pelvic radiotherapy on bowel function. PATIENTS AND METHODS: As part of a prospective randomized trial evaluating the impact of sucralfate on bowel function in patients receiving pelvic radiotherapy, patient-assessed bowel function data were collected during radiotherapy and again at 4 weeks and 1 year after completion of radiotherapy. RESULTS: The number of bowel movements per day increased up to week 4 and then slowly decreased. At 1 year, the mean number of bowel movements per day had increased from 1.75 to 2.09 and the median from 1 to 2. All measures of adverse bowel function worsened during radiotherapy. Frequency of bowel movements and symptoms of frequency, nocturnal bowel movements, cramping, and bleeding returned close to baseline values by 1 year. Symptoms of urgency, clustering, and measures of incontinence were all persistent at 1 year. The mean increase in bowel function score at 1 year was 0.74 (range, -5 to 7). CONCLUSION: Pelvic radiotherapy is associated with a slight increase in bowel movement frequency and decrease in several patient-reported measures of adverse bowel function. Several measures of adverse function persisted at 1 year.