A randomized, placebo-controlled phase III trial of masitinib plus gemcitabine in the treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: Masitinib is a selective oral tyrosine-kinase inhibitor. The efficacy and safety of masitinib combined with gemcitabine was compared against single-agent gemcitabine in patients with advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with inoperable, chemotherapy-naïve, PDAC were randomized (1 : 1) to receive gemcitabine (1000 mg/m(2)) in combination with either masitinib (9 mg/kg/day) or a placebo. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) in the modified intent-to-treat population. Secondary OS analyses aimed to characterize subgroups with poor survival while receiving single-agent gemcitabine with subsequent evaluation of masitinib therapeutic benefit. These prospectively declared subgroups were based on pharmacogenomic data or a baseline characteristic. RESULTS: Three hundred and fifty-three patients were randomly assigned to receive either masitinib plus gemcitabine (N = 175) or placebo plus gemcitabine (N = 178). Median OS was similar between treatment-arms for the overall population, at respectively, 7.7 and 7.1 months, with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.89 (95% CI [0.70; 1.13]. Secondary analyses identified two subgroups having a significantly poor survival rate when receiving single-agent gemcitabine; one defined by an overexpression of acyl-CoA oxidase-1 (ACOX1) in blood, and another via a baseline pain intensity threshold (VAS > 20 mm). These subgroups represent a critical unmet medical need as evidenced from median OS of 5.5 months in patients receiving single-agent gemcitabine, and comprise an estimated 63% of patients. A significant treatment effect was observed in these subgroups for masitinib with median OS of 11.7 months in the 'ACOX1' subgroup [HR = 0.23 (0.10; 0.51), P = 0.001], and 8.0 months in the 'pain' subgroup [HR = 0.62 (0.43; 0.89), P = 0.012]. Despite an increased toxicity of the combination as compared with single-agent gemcitabine, side-effects remained manageable. CONCLUSIONS: The present data warrant initiation of a confirmatory study that may support the use of masitinib plus gemcitabine for treatment of PDAC patients with overexpression of ACOX1 or baseline pain (VAS > 20mm). Masitinib's effect in these subgroups is also supported by biological plausibility and evidence of internal clinical validation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov:NCT00789633.

Masitinib in advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) after failure of imatinib: a randomized controlled open-label trial.

BACKGROUND: Masitinib is a highly selective tyrosine kinase inhibitor with activity against the main oncogenic drivers of gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST). Masitinib was evaluated in patients with advanced GIST after imatinib failure or intolerance. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Prospective, multicenter, randomized, open-label trial. Patients with inoperable, advanced imatinib-resistant GIST were randomized (1 : 1) to receive masitinib (12 mg/kg/day) or sunitinib (50 mg/day 4-weeks-on/2-weeks-off) until progression, intolerance, or refusal. Primary efficacy analysis was noncomparative, testing whether masitinib attained a median progression-free survival (PFS) (blind centrally reviewed RECIST) threshold of >3 months according to the lower bound of the 90% unilateral confidence interval (CI). Secondary analyses on overall survival (OS) and PFS were comparative with results presented according to a two-sided 95% CI. RESULTS: Forty-four patients were randomized to receive masitinib (n = 23) or sunitinib (n = 21). Median follow-up was 14 months. Patients receiving masitinib experienced less toxicity than those receiving sunitinib, with significantly lower occurrence of severe adverse events (52% versus 91%, respectively, P = 0.008). Median PFS (central RECIST) for the noncomparative primary analysis in the masitinib treatment arm was 3.71 months (90% CI 3.65). Secondary analyses showed that median OS was significantly longer for patients receiving masitinib followed by post-progression addition of sunitinib when compared against patients treated directly with sunitinib in second-line [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.27, 95% CI 0.09-0.85, P = 0.016]. This improvement was sustainable as evidenced by 26-month follow-up OS data (HR = 0.40, 95% CI 0.16-0.96, P = 0.033); an additional 12.4 months survival advantage being reported for the masitinib treatment arm. Risk of progression while under treatment with masitinib was in the same range as for sunitinib (HR = 1.1, 95% CI 0.6-2.2, P = 0.833). CONCLUSIONS: Primary efficacy analysis ensured the masitinib treatment arm could satisfy a prespecified PFS threshold. Secondary efficacy analysis showed that masitinib followed by the standard of care generated a statistically significant survival benefit over standard of care. Encouraging median OS and safety data from this well-controlled and appropriately designed randomized trial indicate a positive benefit-risk ratio. Further development of masitinib in imatinib-resistant/intolerant patients with advanced GIST is warranted.