A phase I/randomized phase II, non-comparative, multicenter, open label trial of CP-547,632 in combination with paclitaxel and carboplatin or paclitaxel and carboplatin alone as first-line treatment for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

PURPOSE: To evaluate the toxicity profile and pharmacological properties of oral CP-547,632 alone and in combination with paclitaxel and carboplatin administered every 3 weeks, and to assess efficacy as measured by the objective response and progressive disease rates of oral CP-547,632 administered in combination with paclitaxel and carboplatin. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with stage IIIB/IV or recurrent non-small cell lung cancer receiving first-line chemotherapy were treated with oral daily CP-547,632 in combination with paclitaxel 225 mg/m(2) and carboplatin AUC = 6 every 3 weeks. Pharmacokinetics parameters for CP-547,632 and paclitaxel were determined independently and during co-administration. RESULTS: Seventy patients were enrolled and 68 patients were treated, 37 in phase 1 and 31 in phase 2 (14 with the combination and 17 with chemotherapy alone). Dose-limiting toxicity of CP-547,632 250 mg by mouth daily in combination with paclitaxel and carboplatin was grade 3 rash and grade 3 diarrhea despite medical intervention. CP-547,632 did not significantly affect the pharmacologic profiles of paclitaxel and carboplatin. No subject had CR. In phase I, seven subjects (22.6%) had a confirmed partial response. In phase II, four subjects (28.6%) receiving CP-547,632 plus chemotherapy had a confirmed partial response. In the phase II chemotherapy alone group, four subjects (25%) had a confirmed partial response. CONCLUSION: The combination of CP-547,632 and paclitaxel and carboplatin was well-tolerated at doses up to 200 mg by mouth daily. Dose-limiting toxicity of CP-547,632 at 250 mg consisted of diarrhea and rash. CP-547,632 did not increase the objective response rate to chemotherapy alone in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

Efficacy and Safety Results From a Phase II, Placebo-Controlled Study of Onartuzumab Plus First-Line Platinum-Doublet Chemotherapy for Advanced Squamous Cell Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: The treatment options for squamous cell non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are limited. We assessed the efficacy and safety of onartuzumab plus platinum-doublet chemotherapy in previously untreated advanced squamous cell NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The patients were randomized to receive onartuzumab plus paclitaxel plus carboplatin/cisplatin (n = 55) or placebo plus paclitaxel plus carboplatin/cisplatin (n = 54). Randomization was stratified by MET diagnostic status: MET immunohistochemistry (IHC)-positive (MET IHC 3+/2+) or MET IHC-negative (MET IHC 1+/0). The co-primary endpoints were investigator-assessed progression-free survival in the intent-to-treat and the MET IHC+ populations. RESULTS: The risk of disease progression or death was similar between the 2 treatment arms in both the intent-to-treat (stratified hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% confidence interval, 0.63-1.43) and MET IHC+ populations (unstratified hazard ratio, 1.27; 95% confidence interval, 0.69-2.32). Comparable results were obtained for overall survival and the objective response rate. In all safety-evaluable patients, the grade 3 to 5 adverse events occurring at a > 5% greater incidence in the onartuzumab-containing versus the placebo-containing arm were neutropenia (14.8% vs. 5.8%) and pulmonary embolism (5.6% vs. 0%). Eight patients died as a result of adverse events: 1 case each of pneumonitis, pneumonia, cardiac failure, and unexplained death in the onartuzumab arm and 1 case each of hemorrhage, cardiac arrest, hemoptysis, and febrile neutropenia in the placebo arm. CONCLUSION: Studies using alternative assays of MET activation might help to clarify the role of onartuzumab. However, with the lack of clinical activity seen in the present study, the development of onartuzumab for squamous cell NSCLC will not be pursued further.

Efficacy and Safety of Onartuzumab in Combination With First-Line Bevacizumab- or Pemetrexed-Based Chemotherapy Regimens in Advanced Non-Squamous Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Onartuzumab is a monovalent monoclonal antibody that binds with the extracellular domain of the MET receptor. Given the role of MET in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), we investigated whether onartuzumab added to first-line chemotherapy efficacy in non-squamous NSCLC. METHODS: Patients with untreated stage IIIB/IV non-squamous NSCLC, stratified by MET diagnostic status, were randomized to receive onartuzumab (15 mg/kg intravenously every 3 weeks) or placebo in combination with either paclitaxel/platinum/bevacizumab (bevacizumab cohort), or in combination with platinum/pemetrexed (pemetrexed cohort) with maintenance bevacizumab or pemetrexed and onartuzumab/placebo as appropriate. Co-primary endpoints of this phase II study were progression-free survival (PFS) in all patients and in MET+ patients (2+/3+), defined by the Ventana immunohistochemistry assay; secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), safety, and pharmacokinetics. RESULTS: Efficacy data were available for 139 and 120 patients in the bevacizumab and pemetrexed cohorts, respectively. No benefit was seen in the PFS endpoint in the intent-to treat population of either cohort, but was numerically worse in the onartuzumab arm of the MET+ subgroup of the bevacizumab cohort. The onartuzumab and placebo arms had similar ORR and OS results in both cohorts. A higher incidence of some adverse events was observed with onartuzumab versus placebo, including peripheral edema (30% vs. 3%, bevacizumab cohort; 48% vs. 14%, pemetrexed cohort) and venous thromboembolic events (bevacizumab cohort only, 15% vs. 6%). CONCLUSION: Onartuzumab does not appear to provide any additional clinical benefit when given in combination with current first-line standard-of-care chemotherapy for non-squamous NSCLC.

Phase II randomized trial comparing sequential first-line everolimus and second-line sunitinib versus first-line sunitinib and second-line everolimus in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

PURPOSE: A multicenter, randomized phase II trial, RECORD-3, was conducted to compare first-line everolimus followed by sunitinib at progression with the standard sequence of first-line sunitinib followed by everolimus in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: RECORD-3 used a crossover treatment design. The primary objective was to assess progression-free survival (PFS) noninferiority of first-line everolimus compared with first-line sunitinib. Secondary end points included combined PFS for each sequence, overall survival (OS), and safety. RESULTS: Of 471 enrolled patients, 238 were randomly assigned to first-line everolimus followed by sunitinib, and 233 were randomly assigned to first-line sunitinib followed by everolimus. The primary end point was not met; the median PFS was 7.9 months for first-line everolimus and 10.7 months for first-line sunitinib (hazard ratio [HR], 1.4; 95% CI, 1.2 to 1.8). Among patients who discontinued first-line, 108 (45%) crossed over from everolimus to second-line sunitinib, and 99 (43%) crossed over from sunitinib to second-line everolimus. The median combined PFS was 21.1 months for sequential everolimus then sunitinib and was 25.8 months for sequential sunitinib then everolimus (HR, 1.3; 95% CI, 0.9 to 1.7). The median OS was 22.4 months for sequential everolimus and then sunitinib and 32.0 months for sequential sunitinib and then everolimus (HR, 1.2; 95% CI, 0.9 to 1.6). Common treatment-emergent adverse events during first-line everolimus or sunitinib were stomatitis (53% and 57%, respectively), fatigue (45% and 51%, respectively), and diarrhea (38% and 57%, respectively). CONCLUSION: Everolimus did not demonstrate noninferiority compared with sunitinib as a first-line therapy. The trial results support the standard treatment paradigm of first-line sunitinib followed by everolimus at progression.

A phase II study of weekly nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel with or without trastuzumab in metastatic breast cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Weekly administration of nanoparticle albumin-bound (nab) paclitaxel as a first-line treatment for metastatic breast cancer (MBC) has not been fully investigated. The addition of trastuzumab, a monoclonal antibody against human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), is less understood. This phase II study evaluated the efficacy and safety of weekly nab paclitaxel in the first-line MBC setting. Patients whose tumors overexpressed HER2 also received trastuzumab. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer received nab paclitaxel (125 mg/m(2)) by 30-minute intravenous infusion weekly for 3 of 4 weeks. Patients who were HER2-positive received concurrent trastuzumab. RESULTS: Seventy-two patients were enrolled; HER2 expression was detected in 22 patients. The overall response rate (ORR) was 42.2% (95% CI, 30%-55%); 5 patients had a complete response (CR) and 22 patients had a partial response (PR). Additionally, 17 patients experienced stable disease (SD), providing an overall benefit (CR + PR + SD) of 68.8%. Patients with HER2-positive tumors had an ORR of 52.4%; the ORR was 38.1% in the HER2-negative population (P = .3). Median progression-free survival was 14.5 months (range, 1-49.3 months) and survival rates at 1 year and 2 years were 69% and 62%, respectively. The most commonly observed toxicities were pain (64%), fatigue (58%), sensory neuropathy (54%), infection (46%), nausea (38%), alopecia (33%), and anemia (33%). CONCLUSION: Our findings demonstrate that weekly nab paclitaxel has a favorable safety profile and is well tolerated as a first-line treatment for MBC. An ORR of 42% and an overall benefit of 69% is extremely encouraging, particularly in the HER2-positive population where 52% of patients responded.

A phase II trial of FOLFOX6 and cetuximab in the first-line treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

INTRODUCTION: This phase II trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of cetuximab combined with FOLFOX6 (leucovorin [LV] 5-fluorouracil [5-FU]/oxaliplatin) in the first-line treatment of patients with advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with locally advanced or metastatic CRC who had received no previous therapy for advanced disease were treated with cetuximab at a loading dose of 400 mg/m2 followed by 250 mg/m2 weekly and a FOLFOX6 regimen every 2 weeks consisting of oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, LV 400 mg/m2, and 5-FU bolus 400 mg/m2 followed by 5-FU continuous infusion 2400 mg/m2 over 46 hours. RESULTS: A total of 82 eligible patients were enrolled; epidermal growth factor receptor expression was positive in 67 patients. The overall response rate was 44.8%. In addition, 30 patients (44.8%) in the evaluable population experienced stable disease. Median time to progression or death was 9.3 months (95% CI, 7.0-11.3 months), and median survival was 21.7 months (95% CI, 17.5-27.8 months). Patients who experienced skin toxicity had a statistically significant and longer median survival time than those patients with no skin toxicity (P = .0001). The most commonly observed toxicities were neutropenia (65%), fatigue (56.3%), diarrhea (53.8%), nausea (50%), acneiform rash (41.3%), and stomatitis (35%). CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrate that cetuximab can be safely combined with FOLFOX6 for the first-line treatment of patients with metastatic CRC (mCRC). The efficacy parameters are similar to other first-line regimens in mCRC. Because of the emergence of KRAS as a predictive marker, this regimen has promise in KRAS wild-type mCRC.

Hematologic response to three alternative dosing schedules of azacitidine in patients with myelodysplastic syndromes.

PURPOSE: Azacitidine (AZA) is effective treatment for myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) at a dosing schedule of 75 mg/m(2)/d subcutaneously for 7 days every 4 weeks. The initial phase of this ongoing multicenter, community-based, open-label study evaluated three alternative AZA dosing schedules without weekend dosing. PATIENTS AND METHODS: MDS patients were randomly assigned to one of three regimens every 4 weeks for six cycles: AZA 5-2-2 (75 mg/m(2)/d subcutaneously for 5 days, followed by 2 days no treatment, then 75 mg/m(2)/d for 2 days); AZA 5-2-5 (50 mg/m(2)/d subcutaneously for 5 days, followed by 2 days no treatment, then 50 mg/m(2)/d for 5 days); or AZA 5 (75 mg/m(2)/d subcutaneously for 5 days). RESULTS: Of patients randomly assigned to AZA 5-2-2 (n = 50), AZA 5-2-5 (n = 51), or AZA 5 (n = 50), most were French-American-British (FAB) lower risk (refractory anemia [RA]/RA with ringed sideroblasts/chronic myelomonocytic leukemia with < 5% bone marrow blasts, 63%) or RA with excess blasts (30%), and 79 (52%) completed > or = six treatment cycles. Hematologic improvement (HI) was achieved by 44% (22 of 50), 45% (23 of 51), and 56% (28 of 50) of AZA 5-2-2, AZA 5-2-5, and AZA 5 arms, respectively. Proportions of RBC transfusion-dependent patients who achieved transfusion independence were 50% (12 of 24), 55% (12 of 22), and 64% (16 of 25), and of FAB lower-risk transfusion-dependent patients were 53% (nine of 17), 50% (six of 12), and 61% (11 of 18), respectively. In the AZA 5-2-2, AZA 5-2-5, and AZA 5 groups, 84%, 77%, and 58%, respectively, experienced > or = 1 grade 3 to 4 adverse events. CONCLUSION: All three alternative dosing regimens produced HI, RBC transfusion independence, and safety responses consistent with the currently approved AZA regimen. These results support AZA benefits in transfusion-dependent lower-risk MDS patients.

Experience with intravenous ribavirin in the treatment of hemorrhagic fever with renal syndrome in Korea.

Results of a clinical study using intravenous (IV) ribavirin for treating Department of Defense personnel with hemorrhagic fever with renal syndrome (HFRS) acquired in Korea from 1987 to 2005 were reviewed to determine the clinical course of HFRS treated with IV ribavirin. A total of 38 individuals enrolled in the study had subsequent serological confirmation of HFRS. Four of the 38 individuals received three or fewer doses of ribavirin and were excluded from treatment analysis. Of the remaining 34 individuals, oliguria was present in one individual at treatment initiation; none of the remaining 33 subjects developed oliguria or required dialysis. The mean peak serum creatinine was 3.46 mg/dl and occurred on day 2 of ribavirin therapy. Both the peak serum creatinine and the onset of polyuria occurred on mean day 6.8 of illness. Reversible hemolytic anemia was the main adverse event of ribavirin, with a >or=25% decrease in hematocrit observed in 26/34 (76.5%) individuals. While inability to adjust for all baseline variables prevents comparison to historical cohorts in Korea where oliguria has been reported in 39-69% cases and dialysis required in approximately 40% HFRS cases caused by Hantaan virus, the occurrence of 3% oliguria and 0% dialysis requirement in the treatment cohort is supportive of a previous placebo-controlled HFRS trial in China where IV ribavirin given early resulted in decreased occurrence of oliguria and decreased severity of renal insufficiency.