Disease-modifying effects of ranibizumab for central retinal vein occlusion.

PURPOSE: To identify anatomic endpoints altered by intravitreal ranibizumab in central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) to determine any potential underlying disease modification that occurs with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) therapy beyond best-corrected visual acuity and central optical coherence tomography outcomes. METHODS: A post hoc analysis of a double-masked, multicenter, randomized clinical trial was performed. A total of 392 patients with macular edema after CRVO were randomized 1:1:1 to receive monthly intraocular injections of 0.3 or 0.5 mg of ranibizumab or sham injections. Central reading center-read data were reviewed to explore potential anatomic endpoints altered by therapy. RESULTS: At 6 months, there was a reduction in the ranibizumab groups compared with sham groups with respect to total area of retinal hemorrhage (median change from baseline in disc areas: - 1.17 [sham], - 2.37 [ranibizumab 0.3 mg], - 1.64 [ranibizumab 0.5 mg]), development of disc neovascularization (prevalence: 3% [sham], 0% [ranibizumab 0.3 mg], 0% [ranibizumab 0.5 mg]), and presence of papillary swelling (prevalence: 22.9% [sham], 8.0% [ranibizumab 0.3 mg], 8.3% [ranibizumab 0.5 mg], p < 0.01). There was no difference between groups in collateral vessel formation. Analysis of vitreous and preretinal hemorrhage could not be performed due to low frequency of events in both treated and sham groups. CONCLUSIONS: Ranibizumab for CRVO resulted in beneficial disease-modifying effects through a reduction in retinal hemorrhage, neovascularization, and papillary swelling. These findings may form the basis for future work in the development of a treatment response or severity scale for eyes with CRVO.

Pirfenidone Reduces Respiratory-related Hospitalizations in Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis.

RATIONALE: Respiratory-related hospitalizations of patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) are more frequent than those for acute IPF exacerbations and are associated with poor outcomes. OBJECTIVES: To compare the risk of nonelective hospitalization by type (all-cause, respiratory related, and non-respiratory related) and death after hospitalization with use of pirfenidone versus placebo over 52 weeks using data derived from three phase III IPF clinical trials. METHODS: Individual patient data was pooled from three phase III randomized, placebo-controlled studies of pirfenidone for IPF (the two CAPACITY [Clinical Studies Assessing Pirfenidone in IPF: Research of Efficacy and Safety Outcomes] trials and the ASCEND [Assessment of Pirfenidone to Confirm Efficacy and Safety in Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis] trial), including all patients randomized to pirfenidone 2,403 mg/d (n = 623) or placebo (n = 624). The risk of hospitalization over 52 weeks was compared using standard time-to-event methods. Among those hospitalized, the risk of death after hospitalization was compared with adjustment for treatment group propensity. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 1,247 patients (692 from the CAPACITY trials and 555 from the ASCEND trial) were included in the pooled analysis. Pirfenidone was associated with lower risk of respiratory-related hospitalization than placebo (7% vs. 12%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.52; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36-0.77; P = 0.001), but all-cause (HR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.70-1.19; P = 0.528) or non-respiratory-related hospitalization (HR, 1.32; 95% CI, 0.92-1.88; P = 0.145) was not. Among those hospitalized for any reason, treatment with pirfenidone was associated with lower risk of death after hospitalization up to 52 weeks after randomization, but this association was no longer significant with longer follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: In a pooled analysis of three phase III IPF clinical trials, patients receiving pirfenidone had a lower risk of nonelective respiratory-related hospitalization over the course of 1 year. The effect of pirfenidone on death after hospitalization is uncertain.

Disease, treatment, and outcome differences between men and women with follicular lymphoma in the United States.

We aimed to comprehensively study sex differences in disease and patients' characteristics, treatment and outcomes in patients with follicular lymphoma (FL) in the United States (USA) utilizing the National LymphoCare Study registry (2004-2014). Among evaluable males (n = 1277) and females (n = 1375) with FL, females less commonly received anthracyclines and were more likely to receive rituximab monotherapy. Overall response rates were comparable between sex groups. With a median follow-up of 8.1 years, male sex emerged as an adverse factor for PFS (HR, 0.84, 95% CI, 0.72-0.97). Lymphoma-related mortality (HR, 0.46; 0.23-0.93) and overall survival (HR, 0.63; 0.41-0.97) favored females aged ≤60 years. There are subtle differences in outcomes between male and female FL patients diagnosed and treated in the contemporary era. These data represent the largest prospective analysis of FL patients in the USA based on sex and can aid design of clinical trials for this disease. Am. J. Hematol. 91:770-775, 2016. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Expanded access study of patients with advanced basal cell carcinoma treated with the Hedgehog pathway inhibitor, vismodegib.

BACKGROUND: Vismodegib, a first-in-class Hedgehog pathway inhibitor, was US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved for advanced basal cell carcinomas (BCCs) based on a single, nonrandomized, phase-II trial. Consequently, additional clinical data are critical to confirm the efficacy and safety of vismodegib. OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess efficacy and safety of vismodegib, while providing early drug access to patients with advanced BCC and limited treatment options. METHODS: This was an open-label, multicenter study in patients with advanced BCC inappropriate for radiotherapy or surgery. Patients received 150 mg vismodegib daily until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. Tumor response was assessed via Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.0. RESULTS: A total of 119 patients with advanced BCC took vismodegib for a median of 5.5 months. Objective responses occurred in 46.4% of locally advanced BCC and 30.8% of patients with metastatic BCC. Response was negatively associated with prior systemic therapy in patients with locally advanced BCC (P = .002). Mean follow-up for safety was 6.5 months, with muscle spasms (70.6%), dysgeusia (70.6%), alopecia (58.0%), and diarrhea (25.2%) as the most common adverse events. LIMITATIONS: Abbreviated follow-up time because of study termination upon FDA approval was a limitation. CONCLUSION: This study provides important clinical data supporting the efficacy and safety of vismodegib. Larger studies are underway to assess predictors of response and long-term outcomes.

Aqueous humour interleukin-6 and vision outcomes with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy.

BACKGROUND: This analysis evaluated aqueous humour (AH) interleukin (IL)-6 concentrations and the association between AH IL-6 and visual outcomes in patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) or diabetic macular oedema (DMO) receiving anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) monotherapy. METHODS: Post hoc analysis of the multicentre, double-masked, randomised HARBOR (NCT00891735) and READ-3 (NCT01077401) trials. HARBOR enrolled treatment-naïve nAMD patients. READ-3 enrolled treatment-naïve/previously treated DMO patients. HARBOR patients received ranibizumab 0.5 or 2.0 mg monthly or as needed; AH samples were collected at month 2, after two previous intravitreal injections. READ-3 patients received ranibizumab 0.5 or 2.0 mg as needed; AH samples were collected at baseline and months 3, 6, 9, and 12. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: association between AH IL-6 concentrations and month 24 best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA). RESULTS: In both trials (HARBOR, N = 36; READ-3, N = 137), patients with higher AH IL-6 concentrations had worse visual outcomes. HARBOR patients with low AH IL-6 concentrations at month 2 had a mean (95% CI) BCVA change at month 24 of +2.9 (-2.6, 8.3) letters, whereas patients with high AH concentrations had a mean (95% CI) BCVA change of -9.0 (-22.7, 4.7) letters. READ-3 patients with low AH concentrations at baseline had a mean (95% CI) BCVA change at month 12 of +9.3 (7.4, 11.3) letters, whereas patients with high AH concentrations had a mean (95% CI) BCVA change of +5.6 (2.2, 9.1) letters. CONCLUSIONS: Higher IL-6 AH concentrations may predict suboptimal visual responses to anti-VEGF monotherapy in patients with nAMD/DMO.

Assessing Real-World Racial Differences Among Patients With Metastatic Triple-Negative Breast Cancer in US Community Practices.

Objective: Real-world data characterizing differences between African American (AA) and White women with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC) are limited. Using 9 years of data collected from community practices throughout the United States, we assessed racial differences in the proportion of patients with mTNBC, and their characteristics, treatment, and overall survival (OS). Methods: This retrospective study analyzed de-identified data from 2,116 patients with mTNBC in the Flatiron Health database (January 2011 to March 2020). Characteristics and treatment patterns between AA and White patients with mTNBC were compared using descriptive statistics. OS was examined using Kaplan-Meier analysis and a multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression model. Results: Among patients with metastatic breast cancer, more AA patients (23%) had mTNBC than White patients (12%). This difference was particularly pronounced in patients who lived in the Northeast, were aged 45-65, had commercial insurance, and had initial diagnosis at stage II. AA patients were younger and more likely to have Medicaid. Clinical characteristics and first-line treatments were similar between AA and White patients. Unadjusted median OS (months) was shorter in AA (10.3; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 9.1, 11.7) vs. White patients (11.9; 95% CI: 10.9, 12.8) but not significantly different. After adjusting for potential confounders, the hazard ratio for OS was 1.09 (95% CI: 0.95, 1.25) for AA vs. White patients. Conclusions: The proportion of patients with mTNBC was higher in AA than White mBC patients treated in community practices. Race did not show an association with OS. Both AA and White patients with mTNBC received similar treatments. OS was similarly poor in both groups, particularly in patients who had not received any documented anti-cancer treatment. Effective treatment remains a substantial unmet need for all patients with mTNBC.

Updated Integrated Analysis of the Efficacy and Safety of Entrectinib in Locally Advanced or Metastatic ROS1 Fusion-Positive Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

PURPOSE: Genetic rearrangements of the tyrosine receptor kinase ROS proto-oncogene 1 (ROS1) are oncogenic drivers in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We report the results of an updated integrated analysis of three phase I or II clinical trials (ALKA-372-001, STARTRK-1, and STARTRK-2) of the ROS1 tyrosine kinase inhibitor, entrectinib, in ROS1 fusion-positive NSCLC. METHODS: The efficacy-evaluable population included adults with locally advanced or metastatic ROS1 fusion-positive NSCLC with or without CNS metastases who received entrectinib ≥ 600 mg orally once per day. Co-primary end points were objective response rate (ORR) assessed by blinded independent central review and duration of response (DoR). Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), intracranial ORR, intracranial DoR, intracranial PFS, and safety. RESULTS: In total, 161 patients with a follow-up of ≥ 6 months were evaluable. The median treatment duration was 10.7 months (IQR, 6.4-17.7). The ORR was 67.1% (n = 108, 95% CI, 59.3 to 74.3), and responses were durable (12-month DoR rate, 63%, median DoR 15.7 months). The 12-month PFS rate was 55% (median PFS 15.7 months), and the 12-month OS rate was 81% (median OS not estimable). In 24 patients with measurable baseline CNS metastases by blinded independent central review, the intracranial ORR was 79.2% (n = 19; 95% CI, 57.9 to 92.9), the median intracranial PFS was 12.0 months (95% CI, 6.2 to 19.3), and the median intracranial DoR was 12.9 months (12-month rate, 55%). The safety profile in this updated analysis was similar to that reported in the primary analysis, and no new safety signals were found. CONCLUSION: Entrectinib continued to demonstrate a high level of clinical benefit for patients with ROS1 fusion-positive NSCLC, including patients with CNS metastases.

Timing of Peak Vision Gains in Patients with Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration Treated with Ranibizumab.

PURPOSE: To investigate whether time to peak best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was predictive of magnitude of BCVA changes at study end in patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) who received ranibizumab and assess whether patient baseline characteristics and on-study events were predictive of time to peak BCVA. DESIGN: Exploratory analysis of data from HARBOR (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT00891735). PARTICIPANTS: Treatment-naïve patients 50 years of age or older with subfoveal nAMD. METHODS: Data by ranibizumab dose were pooled; data by dosing schedule (pro re nata [PRN] and monthly) were evaluated separately. Time to peak BCVA was the monthly evaluation at which the patient's greatest gain in Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) letters from baseline was achieved. Early peakers achieved peak BCVA between day 7 and month 6; late peakers achieved peak BCVA between months 7 and 12, months 13 and 18, and months 19 and 24. Variables evaluated for effect of time to peak BCVA included baseline demographic and clinical characteristics, presence of persistent subretinal fluid (SRF) or intraretinal fluid (IRF), and on-study events (atrophy status, fibrosis, retinal pigment epithelium tears). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Time to peak BCVA and its predictive value for magnitude of BCVA changes and BCVA at month 24 (study end). RESULTS: Most patients reached peak BCVA after more than 6 months of treatment: 64% in the PRN group (301/474) and 70% in the monthly groups (327/469). Thirty-six percent and 30% of patients, respectively, peaked early, and 64% and 70%, respectively, peaked late. At month 24, early peakers on average lost vision (PRN, -1.6 ETDRS letters; monthly, -1.9 ETDRS letters). By contrast, late peakers achieved significantly better vision gains from baseline (PRN, 8.5-17.7 ETDRS letters; monthly, 10.1-18.7 ETDRS letters). No differences were found in patient characteristics, persistent SRF or IRF, or on-study events to account for the observed different outcomes between early and late peakers. CONCLUSIONS: In most treatment-naïve patients with nAMD, vision gains were achieved at a slower rate (>6 months), and a slower response was associated with better vision outcomes after 24 months of ranibizumab. These findings suggest that continued treatment may result in greater vision improvements when consistent anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy is maintained over a longer period.

BRAFV600 mutations in solid tumors, other than metastatic melanoma and papillary thyroid cancer, or multiple myeloma: a screening study.

BACKGROUND: Mutations in the BRAF gene have been implicated in several human cancers. The objective of this screening study was to identify patients with solid tumors (other than metastatic melanoma or papillary thyroid cancer) or multiple myeloma harboring activating BRAFV600 mutations for enrollment in a vemurafenib clinical study. METHODS: Formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tumor samples were collected and sent to a central laboratory to identify activating BRAFV600 mutations by bidirectional direct Sanger sequencing. RESULTS: Overall incidence of BRAFV600E mutation in evaluable patients (n=548) was 3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.7-4.7): 11% in colorectal tumors (n=75), 6% in biliary tract tumors (n=16), 3% in non-small cell lung cancers (n=71), 2% in other types of solid tumors (n=180), and 3% in multiple myeloma (n=31). There were no BRAFV600 mutations in this cohort of patients with ovarian tumors (n=68), breast cancer (n=86), or prostate cancer (n=21). CONCLUSION: This multicenter, national screening study confirms previously reported incidences of BRAFV600 mutations from single-center studies. Patients identified with BRAFV600 mutations were potentially eligible for enrollment in the VE-BASKET study.

Safety and efficacy of vismodegib in patients aged ≥65 years with advanced basal cell carcinoma.

Because many patients with unresectable basal cell carcinoma (BCC) are aged ≥65 years, this study explores the efficacy and safety of vismodegib in these patients with locally advanced (la) or metastatic (m) basal cell carcinoma (BCC) in the ERIVANCE BCC trial and the expanded access study (EAS).We compared patients aged ≥65 years to patients aged <65 years taking vismodegib 150 mg/day, using descriptive statistics for response and safety. Patients aged ≥65 years (laBCC/mBCC) were enrolled in ERIVANCE BCC (33/14) and EAS (27/26). Investigator-assessed best overall response rate in patients ≥65 and <65 years was 46.7%/35.7% and 72.7%/52.6% (laBCC/mBCC), respectively, in ERIVANCE BCC and 45.8%/33.3% and 46.9%/28.6%, respectively, in EAS. These differences were not clinically meaningful. Safety was similar in both groups, although those aged ≥65 years had a higher percentage of grade 3-5 adverse events than those aged <65 years. Vismodegib demonstrated similar clinical activity and adverse events regardless of age.

Safety and efficacy of vismodegib in patients with basal cell carcinoma nevus syndrome: pooled analysis of two trials.

BACKGROUND: Aberrant activation of the Hedgehog (Hh) pathway is a key driver in the pathogenesis of basal cell carcinomas (BCCs), including patients with BCC nevus syndrome (BCCNS). It is unclear whether BCCs arising in patients with BCCNS respond differently to vismodegib than in patients without BCCNS. We examined the best overall response rate (BORR) and adverse events (AEs) of vismodegib in patients with advanced BCC (aBCC) with and without BCCNS. METHODS: Patients were treated with vismodegib 150 mg/day in the ERIVANCE BCC trial (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00833417) and the expanded access study (EAS; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01160250). BCCNS diagnosis was based on medical history at the time of enrollment. Metastatic BCC response was evaluated using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors, version 1.0 (RECIST v1.0) in both studies. Locally advanced BCC was evaluated by a novel composite end point in ERIVANCE BCC and by RECIST v1.0 in the EAS. Response assessments were performed every 8 weeks in ERIVANCE BCC and every 8-16 weeks in the EAS. Safety assessments (National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 3.0) were performed monthly in both trials. Because of described differences in response assessment/schedule, patients with BCCNS were not pooled across trials. Analytic cohorts for BCCNS and sporadic aBCC were created within each trial for comparison using descriptive statistical methods. RESULTS: Forty-one patients with BCCNS were included in the study: 22 from ERIVANCE BCC and 19 from the EAS. Investigator-assessed BORR in BCCNS groups ranged from 31 to 81 % in patients with locally advanced BCC (n = 33) and was 50 % in patients with metastatic BCC (n = 6). These results were comparable with the non-BCCNS groups. Incidence and severity of AEs were also comparable between the BCCNS and non-BCCNS groups. Amenorrhea was observed in both patient cohorts and was reversible in two patients who discontinued treatment. CONCLUSION: Vismodegib demonstrated comparable efficacy and safety against aBCC in patients with and without BCCNS.

A single-arm, open-label, expanded access study of vemurafenib in patients with metastatic melanoma in the United States.

PURPOSE: This open-label, multicenter study was designed to allow access to vemurafenib for patients with metastatic melanoma, bridging the time between end of enrollment in the phase III registration trial (December 2010) and commercial availability following US Food and Drug Administration approval of vemurafenib for the treatment of unresectable or metastatic BRAF-mutated melanoma (August 2011). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients had metastatic melanoma with a BRAF mutation (detected by the cobas 4800 BRAF V600 Mutation Test). Unlike previous vemurafenib trials, patients with poor performance status (PS) and treated brain metastases were permitted. Enrolled patients received oral vemurafenib 960 mg twice daily. RESULTS: Of 374 patients enrolled at 29 US sites (December 2010 to October 2011), 371 patients received vemurafenib and were followed up for a median of 2.8 months (the study had a prespecified end upon vemurafenib approval and commercial availability). At baseline, most patients (75%) had stage M1c disease, and 19% had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group PS of 2 or 3; 72% of patients had received prior systemic therapy for metastatic melanoma, 27% received prior ipilimumab, and 29% radiotherapy for prior brain metastases. Because reassessment data to confirm response were not available for most patients, point estimates of objective response rate (ORR) are reported. Among 241 efficacy-evaluable patients, the ORR was 54% (median time to response, 1.9 months). The ORR in non-central nervous system sites in patients with previously treated brain metastases (n = 68) was 53%. The ORR in prior ipilimumab-treated patients (n = 68) was 52%. For patients with PS of 0 or 1 (n = 210) and 2 or 3 (n = 31), the ORRs were 55%, and 42%, respectively. The safety profile observed was consistent with that reported in previous studies. The number of patients with grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events was higher in patients with PS 2 or 3 than in those with PS 0 or 1 (10% vs. 5%, respectively). Adverse events requiring a dose reduction (at least 1 level) occurred in 11% of patients, and 9 patients (2%) experienced events leading to vemurafenib withdrawal, including 2 with repeated QT interval prolongation. DISCUSSION: This study confirmed the established rapid and high tumor response rate achievable with vemurafenib in BRAF mutation-positive metastatic melanoma. Several groups not included in previous studies, including patients with previously treated brain metastases, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group PS 2 to 3, or previous ipilimumab treatment had benefitted from vemurafenib similar to the overall population. No new safety signals were detected.