Phase 3 Trial of Selpercatinib in Advanced RET-Mutant Medullary Thyroid Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Selpercatinib, a highly selective, potent RET inhibitor, has shown efficacy in advanced RET-mutant medullary thyroid cancer in a phase 1-2 trial, but its efficacy as compared with approved multikinase inhibitors is unclear. METHODS: We conducted a phase 3, randomized trial comparing selpercatinib as first-line therapy with the physician's choice of cabozantinib or vandetanib (control group). Eligible patients had progressive disease documented within 14 months before enrollment. The primary end point in the protocol-specified interim efficacy analysis was progression-free survival, assessed by blinded independent central review. Crossover to selpercatinib was permitted among patients in the control group after disease progression. Treatment failure-free survival, assessed by blinded independent central review, was a secondary, alpha-controlled end point that was to be tested only if progression-free survival was significant. Among the other secondary end points were overall response and safety. RESULTS: A total of 291 patients underwent randomization. At a median follow-up of 12 months, median progression-free survival as assessed by blinded independent central review was not reached in the selpercatinib group and was 16.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 12.2 to 25.1) in the control group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.16 to 0.48; P<0.001). Progression-free survival at 12 months was 86.8% (95% CI, 79.8 to 91.6) in the selpercatinib group and 65.7% (95% CI, 51.9 to 76.4) in the control group. Median treatment failure-free survival as assessed by blinded independent central review was not reached in the selpercatinib group and was 13.9 months in the control group (hazard ratio for disease progression, discontinuation due to treatment-related adverse events, or death, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.15 to 0.42; P<0.001). Treatment failure-free survival at 12 months was 86.2% (95% CI, 79.1 to 91.0) in the selpercatinib group and 62.1% (95% CI, 48.9 to 72.8) in the control group. The overall response was 69.4% (95% CI, 62.4 to 75.8) in the selpercatinib group and 38.8% (95% CI, 29.1 to 49.2) in the control group. Adverse events led to a dose reduction in 38.9% of the patients in the selpercatinib group, as compared with 77.3% in the control group, and to treatment discontinuation in 4.7% and 26.8%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Selpercatinib treatment resulted in superior progression-free survival and treatment failure-free survival as compared with cabozantinib or vandetanib in patients with RET-mutant medullary thyroid cancer. (Funded by Loxo Oncology, a subsidiary of Eli Lilly; LIBRETTO-531 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04211337.).

First-Line Selpercatinib or Chemotherapy and Pembrolizumab in RET Fusion-Positive NSCLC.

BACKGROUND: Selpercatinib, a highly selective potent and brain-penetrant RET inhibitor, was shown to have efficacy in patients with advanced RET fusion-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in a nonrandomized phase 1-2 study. METHODS: In a randomized phase 3 trial, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of first-line selpercatinib as compared with control treatment that consisted of platinum-based chemotherapy with or without pembrolizumab at the investigator's discretion. The primary end point was progression-free survival assessed by blinded independent central review in both the intention-to-treat-pembrolizumab population (i.e., patients whose physicians had planned to treat them with pembrolizumab in the event that they were assigned to the control group) and the overall intention-to-treat population. Crossover from the control group to the selpercatinib group was allowed if disease progression as assessed by blinded independent central review occurred during receipt of control treatment. RESULTS: In total, 212 patients underwent randomization in the intention-to-treat-pembrolizumab population. At the time of the preplanned interim efficacy analysis, median progression-free survival was 24.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 16.9 to not estimable) with selpercatinib and 11.2 months (95% CI, 8.8 to 16.8) with control treatment (hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.31 to 0.70; P<0.001). The percentage of patients with an objective response was 84% (95% CI, 76 to 90) with selpercatinib and 65% (95% CI, 54 to 75) with control treatment. The cause-specific hazard ratio for the time to progression affecting the central nervous system was 0.28 (95% CI, 0.12 to 0.68). Efficacy results in the overall intention-to-treat population (261 patients) were similar to those in the intention-to-treat-pembrolizumab population. The adverse events that occurred with selpercatinib and control treatment were consistent with those previously reported. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with selpercatinib led to significantly longer progression-free survival than platinum-based chemotherapy with or without pembrolizumab among patients with advanced RET fusion-positive NSCLC. (Funded by Eli Lilly and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04194944.).

Tumour-agnostic efficacy and safety of selpercatinib in patients with RET fusion-positive solid tumours other than lung or thyroid tumours (LIBRETTO-001): a phase 1/2, open-label, basket trial.

BACKGROUND: Selpercatinib is a first-in-class, highly selective RET kinase inhibitor with CNS activity that has shown efficacy in RET fusion-positive lung and thyroid cancers. RET fusions occur rarely in other tumour types. We aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of selpercatinib in a diverse group of patients with RET fusion-positive non-lung or thyroid advanced solid tumours (ie, a tumour-agnostic population). METHODS: LIBRETTO-001 is an ongoing phase 1/2, single-group, open-label, basket trial of selpercatinib in patients aged 18 years and older (or ≥12 years, where permitted by regulatory authorities) with RET-altered cancers. The trial is being conducted at 89 sites in 16 countries; the tumour-agnostic population was enrolled at 30 sites (outpatient and inpatient medical facilities) across eight countries. A prespecified interim analysis of LIBRETTO-001 was planned to investigate the efficacy and safety of selpercatinib in a tumour-agnostic population of patients with RET fusion-positive advanced solid tumours; the data cutoff date was Sept 24, 2021. Eligible patients had disease progression on or after previous systemic therapies or no satisfactory therapeutic options and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2. Selpercatinib was orally administered in a continuous 28-day cycle. Patients enrolled in the phase 1 dose-escalation portion received between 20 mg once daily or 20-240 mg twice daily; the phase 2 recommended dose was 160 mg twice daily. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate as determined by the independent review committee. The efficacy-evaluable tumour-agnostic population was defined as patients with RET fusion-positive cancer, other than non-small-cell lung cancer and thyroid cancer, who had at least 6 months of follow-up from the first study dose at the time of data cutoff (all responders at the time of data cutoff were followed up for at least 6 months from the onset of response unless they progressed or died earlier). Safety was analysed in the tumour-agnostic population of patients who had been enrolled and received selpercatinib on or before the data cutoff date. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03157128) and is still recruiting participants. FINDINGS: Between Dec 4, 2017, and Aug 4, 2021, 45 patients with RET fusion-positive tumour-agnostic cancers were enrolled from the phase 1 dose-escalation and phase 2 dose-expansion cohorts of the trial. 43 (96%) of 45 patients received a starting dose of selpercatinib at the recommended dose of 160 mg twice daily. Of the two patients who did not, one received a dose of 160 mg twice daily via intra-patient dose escalation (as allowed per protocol for patients enrolled in the phase 1 portion of the study at lower doses) and the other patient's starting dose of 120 mg twice daily was never escalated. Of the 41 efficacy-evaluable patients, the objective response rate as per the independent review committee was 43·9% (95% CI 28·5-60·3; 18 of 41 patients). The most common grade 3 or worse treatment-emergent adverse events were hypertension (ten [22%] of 45 patients), increased alanine aminotransferase (seven [16%]), and increased aspartate aminotransferase (six [13%]). Treatment-emergent serious adverse events occurred in 18 (40%) of 45 patients. No treatment-related deaths occurred. INTERPRETATION: Selpercatinib showed clinically meaningful activity in the RET fusion-positive tumour-agnostic population, with a safety profile consistent with that observed in other indications. Comprehensive genomic testing that includes RET fusions will be crucial for identifying patients who might benefit from selpercatinib. FUNDING: Loxo Oncology.

Phase III study of selpercatinib versus chemotherapy ± pembrolizumab in untreated RET positive non-small-cell lung cancer.

Selpercatinib, a novel, highly selective and potent, inhibitor of RET, demonstrated clinically meaningful antitumor activity with manageable toxicity in heavily pretreated and treatment-naive RET fusion-positive non-small-cell lung cancer patients in a Phase I/II clinical trial. LIBRETTO-431 (NCT04194944) is a randomized, global, multicenter, open-label, Phase III trial, evaluating selpercatinib versus carboplatin or cisplatin and pemetrexed chemotherapy with or without pembrolizumab in treatment-naive patients with locally advanced/metastatic RET fusion-positive nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer. The primary end point is progression-free survival by independent review. Key secondary end points include overall survival, response rate, duration of response and progression-free survival. Clinical trial registration: NCT04194944 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Effect of Doxorubicin Plus Olaratumab vs Doxorubicin Plus Placebo on Survival in Patients With Advanced Soft Tissue Sarcomas: The ANNOUNCE Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma (STS) have a median overall survival of less than 2 years. In a phase 2 study, an overall survival benefit in this population was observed with the addition of olaratumab to doxorubicin over doxorubicin alone. Objective: To determine the efficacy of doxorubicin plus olaratumab in patients with advanced/metastatic STS. Design, Setting, and Participants: ANNOUNCE was a confirmatory, phase 3, double-blind, randomized trial conducted at 110 sites in 25 countries from September 2015 to December 2018; the final date of follow-up was December 5, 2018. Eligible patients were anthracycline-naive adults with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic STS, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 1, and cardiac ejection fraction of 50% or greater. Interventions: Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive doxorubicin, 75 mg/m2 (day 1), combined with olaratumab (n = 258), 20 mg/kg in cycle 1 and 15 mg/kg in subsequent cycles, or placebo (n = 251) on days 1 and 8 for up to 8 21-day cycles, followed by olaratumab/placebo monotherapy. Main Outcomes and Measures: Dual primary end points were overall survival with doxorubicin plus olaratumab vs doxorubicin plus placebo in total STS and leiomyosarcoma (LMS) populations. Results: Among the 509 patients randomized (mean age, 56.9 years; 58.2% women; 46.0% with LMS), all were included in the primary analysis and had a median length of follow-up of 31 months. No statistically significant difference in overall survival was observed between the doxorubicin plus olaratumab group vs the doxorubicin plus placebo group in either population (total STS: hazard ratio, 1.05 [95% CI, 0.84-1.30], P = .69, median overall survival, 20.4 months vs 19.7 months; LMS: hazard ratio, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.69-1.31], P = .76, median overall survival, 21.6 months vs 21.9 months). Adverse events of grade 3 or greater reported in 15% or more of total patients with STS were neutropenia (46.3% vs 49.0%), leukopenia (23.3% vs 23.7%), and febrile neutropenia (17.5% vs 16.5%). Conclusions and Relevance: In this phase 3 clinical trial of patients with advanced STS, treatment with doxorubicin plus olaratumab vs doxorubicin plus placebo resulted in no significant difference in overall survival. The findings did not confirm the overall survival benefit observed in the phase 2 trial. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02451943.

Necitumumab plus pemetrexed and cisplatin as first-line therapy in patients with stage IV non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (INSPIRE): an open-label, randomised, controlled phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Necitumumab is a second-generation recombinant human immunoglobulin G1 EGFR monoclonal antibody that competitively inhibits ligand binding. We aimed to compare necitumumab plus pemetrexed and cisplatin with pemetrexed and cisplatin alone in patients with previously untreated, stage IV, non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: We did this randomised, open-label, controlled phase 3 study at 103 sites in 20 countries. Patients aged 18 years or older, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-2 and adequate organ function, were randomly assigned 1:1 to treatment with a block randomisation scheme (block size of four) via a telephone-based interactive voice-response system or interactive web-response system. Patients received either cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) and pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2) on day 1 of a 3-week cycle for a maximum of six cycles alone, or with necitumumab 800 mg on days 1 and 8. Necitumumab was continued after the end of chemotherapy until disease progression or unacceptable toxic effects. Randomisation was stratified by smoking history, ECOG performance status, disease histology, and geographical region. Patients and study investigators were not masked to group assignment. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Efficacy analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00982111. FINDINGS: Between Nov 11, 2009, and Feb 2, 2011, we randomly assigned 633 patients to receive either necitumumab plus pemetrexed and cisplatin (n=315) or pemetrexed and cisplatin alone (n=318). Enrolment was stopped on Feb 2, 2011, after a recommendation from the independent data monitoring committee. There was no significant difference in overall survival between treatment groups, with a median overall survival of 11·3 months (95% CI 9·5-13·4) in the necitumumab plus pemetrexed and cisplatin group versus 11·5 months (10·1-13·1) in the pemetrexed and cisplatin group (hazard ratio 1·01 [95% CI 0·84-1·21]; p=0·96). The incidence of grade 3 or worse adverse events, including deaths, was higher in the necitumumab plus pemetrexed and cisplatin group than in the pemetrexed and cisplatin group; in particular, deaths regarded as related to study drug were reported in 15 (5%) of 304 patients in the necitumumab group versus nine (3%) of 312 patients in the pemetrexed and cisplatin group. Serious adverse events were likewise more frequent in the necitumumab plus pemetrexed and cisplatin group than in the pemetrexed and cisplatin group (155 [51%] of 304 vs 127 [41%] of 312 patients). Patients in the necitumumab plus pemetrexed and cisplatin group had more grade 3-4 rash (45 [15%] of 304 vs one [<1%] of 312 patients in the pemetrexed and cisplatin alone group), hypomagnesaemia (23 [8%] vs seven [2%] patients), and grade 3 or higher venous thromboembolic events (23 [8%] vs 11 [4%] patients) than did those in the pemetrexed and cisplatin alone group. INTERPRETATION: Our findings show no evidence to suggest that the addition of necitumumab to pemetrexed and cisplatin increases survival of previously untreated patients with stage IV non-squamous NSCLC. Unless future studies identify potentially useful predictive biomarkers, necitumumab is unlikely to provide benefit in this patient population when combined with pemetrexed and cisplatin. FUNDING: Eli Lilly and Company.

Selpercatinib in Patients With RET Fusion-Positive Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Updated Safety and Efficacy From the Registrational LIBRETTO-001 Phase I/II Trial.

PURPOSE: Selpercatinib, a first-in-class, highly selective, and potent CNS-active RET kinase inhibitor, is currently approved for the treatment of patients with RET fusion-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We provide a registrational data set update in more than double (n = 316) of the original reported population (n = 144) and better characterization of long-term efficacy and safety. METHODS: Patients were enrolled to LIBRETTO-001, a phase I/II, single-arm, open-label study of selpercatinib in patients with RET-altered cancers. An analysis of patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC, including 69 treatment-naive and 247 with prior platinum-based chemotherapy, was performed. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR; RECIST v1.1, independent review committee). Secondary end points included duration of response (DoR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival, and safety. RESULTS: In treatment-naive patients, the ORR was 84% (95% CI, 73 to 92); 6% achieved complete responses (CRs). The median DoR was 20.2 months (95% CI, 13.0 to could not be evaluated); 40% of responses were ongoing at the data cutoff (median follow-up of 20.3 months). The median PFS was 22.0 months; 35% of patients were alive and progression-free at the data cutoff (median follow-up of 21.9 months). In platinum-based chemotherapy pretreated patients, the ORR was 61% (95% CI, 55 to 67); 7% achieved CRs. The median DoR was 28.6 months (95% CI, 20.4 to could not be evaluated); 49% of responses were ongoing (median follow-up of 21.2 months). The median PFS was 24.9 months; 38% of patients were alive and progression-free (median follow-up of 24.7 months). Of 26 patients with measurable baseline CNS metastasis by the independent review committee, the intracranial ORR was 85% (95% CI, 65 to 96); 27% were CRs. In the full safety population (n = 796), the median treatment duration was 36.1 months. The safety profile of selpercatinib was consistent with previous reports. CONCLUSION: In a large cohort with extended follow-up, selpercatinib continued to demonstrate durable and robust responses, including intracranial activity, in previously treated and treatment-naive patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC.

Second-line treatment of stage III/IV non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with pemetrexed in routine clinical practice: evaluation of performance status and health-related quality of life.

BACKGROUND: Second-line treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) improves overall survival. There is a lack of data regarding the impact on patients' overall health condition. This prospective, non-interventional study evaluated performance status (PS) and health-related quality of life (HR-QoL) during second-line pemetrexed treatment in routine clinical practice. METHODS: Stage III/IV NSCLC patients who initiated second-line pemetrexed (standard vitamin and dexamethasone supplementation) were observed for a maximum of 9 treatment cycles. The primary objective was to evaluate the proportion of patients achieving improvement of Karnofsky Index (KI) of ≥ 10% (absolute) or maintaining KI ≥ 80% after the second treatment cycle ("KI benefit response"). HR-QoL was self-rated using the EuroQoL-5D questionnaire (EQ-5D). Factors potentially associated with KI benefit response were evaluated using logistic regression models. RESULTS: Of 521 eligible patients (73.5% Stage IV, median age 66.3 yrs, 36.1% ≥ 70 yrs, 62.0% with KI ≥ 80%), 471 (90.4%) completed at least 2 treatment cycles. 58.0% (95%CI 53.6%;62.2%) achieved KI benefit response after the second cycle. Patients with baseline KI ≥ 80%, no Grade 3/4 toxicities during the first 2 cycles, or combination regimen as prior first-line therapy were more likely to achieve a KI benefit response. EQ-5D scores improved over time. Grade 3/4 toxicities were reported in 23.8% of patients (mainly fatigue/asthenia 15.9%, neutropenia 8.7%). CONCLUSIONS: In this large prospective, non-interventional study of second-line pemetrexed treatment in patients with advanced NSCLC, including 36% elderly patients ( ≥ 70 years), physician-rated PS and self-rated HR-QoL were maintained or improved in the majority of patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00540241) on October 4, 2007.

Quality of life of patients with soft tissue sarcoma treated with doxorubicin in the ANNOUNCE phase III clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs), including health-related quality of life, are recommended to be routinely collected in clinical trials, but data are limited from trials of sarcoma patients. In this analysis, pooled PRO data are reported from patients with advanced or metastatic soft tissue sarcoma (STS) enrolled to the ANNOUNCE phase III trial of doxorubicin-based therapy. METHODS: ANNOUNCE was a phase III trial that randomized 509 patients with STS to receive up to eight cycles of doxorubicin with olaratumab or placebo, followed by single-agent olaratumab or placebo. Dexrazoxane was allowed at any cycle of treatment. Participants completed the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30, which is scored 0-100), and Brief Pain Inventory Short Form Modified (mBPI-sf, scored from 0-10) at each treatment cycle. A descriptive analysis of the longitudinal data was conducted overall and by cumulative dose of doxorubicin received to inform the clinical care of patients with STS. Worsening on the QLQ-C30 was defined as a change of 10 points or more at any post-baseline assessment. Worsening on the mPBI-sf was defined as an increase of ≥2 points from baseline. RESULTS: The majority of participants completed the baseline and at least one subsequent PRO assessment within the trial (n = 460, 90.4% EORTC QLQ-C30; n = 454, 89.2%, mBPI-sf). Patients with STS enrolled to the ANNOUNCE trial had clinically meaningful problems with physical function and pain before initiating doxorubicin. Overall, those with fewer symptoms or better function at baseline received higher cumulative doxorubicin dose throughout the study. At baseline, mean QLQ-C30 fatigue was 29.9 with a median time to first worsening of 0.9 months, and mean nausea/vomiting was 6.5 with 1.4 months until worsening; mean physical function was 78.3 with median time to worsening of 2.1 months and mean health status was 66.8 with median time to first worsening of 1.6 months. Median time to worsening of pain was 7.9 months. CONCLUSION: Patients with advanced or metastatic sarcoma reported a relatively rapid decline in PROs during doxorubicin-based treatment, with patients with poorer symptoms at baseline (specifically fatigue), subsequently receiving less doxorubicin therapy. The availability of detailed summary data from the patient perspective during doxorubicin-based treatment may inform future care of these patients and can provide a resource for the development of PRO endpoints in future trials.

Hypersensitivity Reactions to Selpercatinib Treatment With or Without Prior Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Therapy in Patients With NSCLC in LIBRETTO-001.

INTRODUCTION: Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy has been found to increase the risk/severity of immune-mediated adverse events with subsequent kinase inhibitor treatment in oncogenically driven cancers. We explored the risk for hypersensitivity with selpercatinib, a first-in-class highly selective and potent, central nervous system-active RET inhibitor, in prior ICI-treated patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC compared with their ICI-naive counterparts. METHODS: Data from patients enrolled by December 16, 2019, in the ongoing phase 1/2 LIBRETTO-001 (NCT03157128) trial were analyzed for hypersensitivity reactions reported using preferred terms of hypersensitivity/drug hypersensitivity and defined as a constellation of symptoms/findings characterized by maculopapular rash, often preceded by fever with arthralgias/myalgias, followed by greater than or equal to 1 of the following signs/symptoms: thrombocytopenia, increased aspartate aminotransferase or alanine aminotransferase, hypotension, tachycardia, or increased creatinine. RESULTS: Of 329 patients, 22 (7%) who experienced a grade 1 to 3 hypersensitivity reaction that met the defined constellation of events were attributed to selpercatinib by investigators, and more often in prior ICI-treated (n = 17, 77%) than ICI-naive (n = 5, 23%) patients. There were 19 patients with selpercatinib-related hypersensitivity who resumed selpercatinib post-hypersensitivity with dose modification/supportive care. Furthermore, 17 patients, of whom 14 received prior ICI therapy, were still on treatment at twice daily doses of 40 mg (n = 5), 80 mg (n = 4), 120 mg (n = 4), and 160 mg (n = 4). CONCLUSIONS: Rates of selpercatinib-related hypersensitivity were low overall and, as with other kinase inhibitors, occurred predominantly in prior ICI-treated patients. Hypersensitivity to selpercatinib can be managed with supportive care measures regardless of prior ICI status and is reversible.

Atomoxetine in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: a 6-week, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial in Russia.

The objective of the study was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of once-daily atomoxetine (< or =1.8 mg/(kg day) with those of placebo in children and adolescents (aged 6-16 years) with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder [ADHD (DSM-IV)]. This randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial was conducted in Russia. The primary efficacy measure was baseline-to-end point changes in Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Rating Scale-IV-Parent Version: Investigator-Administered and Scored (ADHDRS-IV-Parent:Inv) total score. Tolerability measures included treatment-emergent signs and symptoms (TESS), laboratory values and weight. Compared with patients in the placebo group (n = 33), patients treated with atomoxetine (n = 72) with a mean final dose of 1.4 mg/kg showed significantly greater improvement in ADHDRS-IV-Parent:Inv total score (least-squares mean: atomoxetine, -15.8; placebo, -11.4; p = 0.013). The most common TESS in the atomoxetine group included anorexia [atomoxetine, n = 13 (18.1%); placebo, n = 2 (6.1%)], somnolence, n = 11 versus n = 3 (15.3% vs. 9.1%, respectively), abdominal pain n = 9 versus n = 1 (12.5% vs. 3.0%, respectively) and nausea, n = 8 versus n = 1 (11.1% vs. 3.0%, respectively). Seven patients in the atomoxetine group and two in the placebo group experienced clinically important weight loss during the study (> or =7% from baseline; mean change, kg: atomoxetine, -0.6; placebo, 0.1; p = 0.032). Atomoxetine is efficacious in improving ADHD symptoms in children and adolescents. Atomoxetine treatment may be associated with a numerically higher incidence of anorexia, somnolence, abdominal pain and nausea, as well as statistically greater losses in body weight.

A phase 1b study of necitumumab in combination with abemaciclib in patients with stage IV non-small cell lung cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Necitumumab, an anti-EGFR antibody, and abemaciclib, a CDK4/6 inhibitor, have shown activity in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and have non-overlapping toxicities. A 2-part, single-arm, multicenter, phase 1b trial was conducted to test the safety and efficacy of necitumumab plus abemaciclib in patients with advanced NSCLC who had received ≤2 lines of chemotherapy, including a platinum-based one. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Part A was a dose-escalation phase for abemaciclib (100, 150, 200 mg, Q12 H) in combination with necitumumab 800 mg D1D8 Q3W to determine the recommended dose for the expansion cohort, Part B. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 3 months. RESULTS: Sixty-six patients entered the study: 71% male, 41% squamous histology, 15% never-smokers. In Part A (n = 15), the maximum tolerated dose of abemaciclib was 150 mg Q12H in combination with necitumumab 800 mg. In 57 patients treated at this dose level, the 3-month PFS rate was 32.3% (95% CI: 20.4-44.8); median PFS was 2.14 months (1.41-2.76). The overall response rate (ORR) was 5.3% (1.1-14.6). The median OS was 6.93 months (4.96-12.85). In the exploratory subgroup analysis of EGFR expression-negative patients (n = 10), both the 3-month PFS and ORR were 0.0%. The most common grade 3 treatment-emergent adverse events were fatigue (14%), dyspnea (9%), diarrhea (7%), vomiting (7%), and hypokalemia (7%). CONCLUSIONS: Abemaciclib 150 mg Q12H with necitumumab 800 mg did not produce an additive effect over single-agent activity in patients with Stage IV NSCLC. The safety profile was consistent with the individual study drugs.

Feasibility of two dose-dense FEC regimens with growth factor support for adjuvant therapy in patients with early breast cancer: results from a randomised study of the Central European Cooperative Oncology Group (CECOG).

Addition of epirubicin to adjuvant chemotherapy can provide important benefits for patients with early breast cancer, but the optimal dose remains unclear. Further improvements can be achieved with dose-dense regimens, but densification of fluorouracil/epirubicin/cyclophosphamide (FEC) has proved difficult, with FEC(60) providing little benefit over standard chemotherapy and FEC(100) associated with toxicity. We investigated the feasibility of two intermediate dose-dense FEC regimens. Patients were randomised to six cycles of FEC(75) or FEC(90), with all three drugs given on day 1 of each 14-day cycle. Patients also received pegfilgrastim 6 mg as a single subcutaneous injection on day 2 of each cycle. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of subjects receiving > or =85% relative dose intensity and was achieved by 96% and 88% of patients in the FEC(75) and FEC(90) arms, respectively. Of 147 FEC(75) infusions, 4.1% were delayed, while 9.8% of 143 FEC(90) infusions were delayed. The most common reasons for delay were adverse events and personal/logistical reasons. One dose reduction occurred during the study (FEC(90)), related to diarrhoea. Grade 3-4 haematological toxicities were reported in two patients in the FEC(90) arm. There were no incidences of febrile neutropenia during the study. The most common adverse events were increases in liver enzymes and gastrointestinal events; no event resulted in discontinuation. Only one patient (FEC(90)) experienced serious adverse events (vomiting and throat oedema). In conclusion, dose-dense FEC(75 )and FEC(90) are feasible with pegfilgrastim support. These regimens are associated with a very low risk of Grade 3-4 toxicity.

First-line treatment of patients with advanced or metastatic squamous non-small cell lung cancer: systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The objectives of this systematic review and meta-analysis were to compare the survival, toxicity, and quality of life of patients treated with necitumumab in combination with gemcitabine and cisplatin. These agents were investigated in published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of patients with squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in the first-line setting. METHODS: The systematic review was executed on January 27, 2015, and updated on August 21, 2016, using a pre-specified search strategy. Searches were conducted using PubMed, Medline, and EMBASE, with supplemental searches using the Evidence Based Medicine Reviews and ClinicalTrials.gov to identify RCTs published in English from 1995-2016 and reporting at least one of the primary outcomes [overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), toxicity, or quality of life] in patients who received first-line treatment for advanced or metastatic squamous NSCLC. Study quality and risk of bias were assessed using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale and Cochrane risk of bias tool, respectively. A Baysian network meta-analysis was performed on the primary outcomes. Hazard ratios (HRs) were evaluated for the primary analysis; secondary analyses were conducted using median OS data. Planned sensitivity analyses were conducted including reanalysis using a Frequentist approach and limiting analyses to subsets based on clinical and demographic covariates. RESULTS: The systematic literature review resulted in identification of 4,016 unique publications; 40 publications (35 unique trials) were eligible for inclusion. Eight studies connected to a common network for the OS analysis using HR data. The majority of studies were not limited to squamous NSCLC, thus analyzable data were limited to a subset of data within the published trials. Carboplatin + S-1 and necitumumab in combination with gemcitabine and cisplatin were associated with lower HRs for OS versus all other comparators. Nine studies connected to the network for the PFS analysis in which necitumumab in combination with gemcitabine and cisplatin was associated with the lowest HR. Data were not available to analyze toxicity or quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: Although the results suggest that carboplatin + S-1 and necitumumab in combination with gemcitabine and cisplatin may have value in terms of OS versus other comparators, the results should be interpreted with caution due to the limited number of studies (with few focused exclusively on squamous NSCLC) and wide credible intervals.

Venous thromboembolism with EGFR monoclonal antibody necitumumab in stage IV non-small cell lung cancer: A retrospective cohort analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is a recognized risk factor for VTE. Some systemic treatments may increase this risk further. Here, we present the risk of VTE and its prognostic significance for patients treated with chemotherapy (chemo) and the EGFR monoclonal antibody necitumumab (neci) for metastatic NSCLC. METHODS: Four trials of 1st-line treatment for Stage IV NSCLC were analyzed: two randomized phase 3 studies of cisplatin/gemcitabine ±neci in squamous NSCLC (SQUIRE: N = 1079) and cisplatin/pemetrexed ±neci in non-squamous NSCLC (INSPIRE: N = 616); JFCL (N = 161), a randomized phase 2 trial of carboplatin/paclitaxel ±neci in squamous NSCLC; and JFCK (N = 61), a single arm phase 2 trial of cisplatin/gemcitabine +neci in squamous NSCLC. A Cox proportional hazards model with VTE as a time-dependent covariate was used for overall survival (OS) analyses. RESULTS: Neci + chemo was associated with an increased risk of VTE (Relative Risk [RR]: 1.579; 95% CI: 1.155-2.158). History of VTE (RR: 1.899; 95% CI: 1.142-3.156) and prior cardiac/cardiovascular events (RR: 1.514; 95% CI: 1.102-2.082) were associated with increased risk of VTE. Decreased VTE risk was seen with: male sex (RR: 0.696; 95% CI: 0.502-0.964), eastern European geographic region (RR: 0.387; 95% CI: 0.267-0.562) and squamous cell pathology (RR: 0.653; 95% CI: 0.483-0.883). VTE occurrence showed no association with OS (HR: 1.121; 95% CI: 0.930-1.351). CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that certain patient characteristics such as prior history of VTE and non-squamous histology might be associated with an increased risk of on-treatment VTE in NSCLC, although in this study, overall survival was not affected. Further studies to develop measures for identifying high-risk patients are needed to inform treatment decisions as well as VTE management and prophylaxis.

Efficacy and Safety of First-Line Necitumumab Plus Gemcitabine and Cisplatin Versus Gemcitabine and Cisplatin in East Asian Patients with Stage IV Squamous Non-small Cell Lung Cancer: A Subgroup Analysis of the Phase 3, Open-Label, Randomized SQUIRE Study.

PURPOSE: The phase 3 randomized SQUIRE study revealed significantly longer overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) for necitumumab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin (neci+GC) than for gemcitabine and cisplatin alone (GC) in 1,093 patients with previously untreated advanced squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This post hoc subgroup analysis assessed the efficacy and safety of neci+GC among East Asian (EA) patients enrolled in the study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients received up to six 3-week cycles of gemcitabine (days 1 and 8, 1,250 mg/m²) and cisplatin (day 1, 75 mg/m²). Patients in the neci+GC arm also received necitumumab (days 1 and 8, 800 mg) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated from stratified Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: In EA patients, there were improvements for neci+GC (n=43) versus GC (n=41) in OS (HR, 0.805; 95% CI, 0.484 to 1.341) and PFS (HR, 0.720; 95% CI, 0.439 to 1.180), consistent with the results for non-EA patients observed in the present study. The overall safety data were consistent between EA and non-EA patients. A numerically higher proportion of patients experienced serious adverse events (AEs), grade ≥ 3 AEs, and AEs with an outcome of death for neci+GC versus GC in EA patients and EA patients versus non-EA patients for neci+GC. CONCLUSION: Although limited by the small sample size and post hoc nature of the analysis, these findings are consistent with those of the overall study and suggest that neci+GC offers a survival advantage and favorable benefit/risk for EA patients with advanced squamous NSCLC.

Gemcitabine, epirubicin, and paclitaxel versus fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide as first-line chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer: a Central European Cooperative Oncology Group International, multicenter, prospective, randomized phase III trial.

BACKGROUND: The objectives of this phase III trial were to compare the time to progressive disease (TtPD), overall response rate (ORR), overall survival, and toxicity of gemcitabine, epirubicin, and paclitaxel (GET) versus fluorouracil (FU), epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide (FEC) as first-line therapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Female patients aged 18 to 75 years with stage IV and measurable MBC were enrolled and randomly assigned to either gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m(2), days 1 and 4), epirubicin (90 mg/m(2), day 1), and paclitaxel (175 mg/m(2), day 1) or FU (500 mg/m(2), day 1), epirubicin (90 mg/m(2), day 1), and cyclophosphamide (500 mg/m(2), day 1). Both regimens were administered every 21 days for a maximum of eight cycles. RESULTS: Between October 1999 and November 2002, 259 patients (GET, n = 124; FEC, n = 135) were enrolled. Baseline characteristics were well balanced across treatment arms. After a median of 20.4 months of follow-up, median TtPD was 9.1 months and 9.0 months in the GET and FEC arms, respectively (P = .557). The ORR was 62.3% in the GET arm (n = 114) and 51.2% in the FEC arm (n = 129; P = .093). Grade 3 and 4 toxicities, including neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, anemia, stomatitis, neurosensory toxicity, and allergy, occurred significantly more often in the GET arm. CONCLUSION: No significant differences in terms of TtPD and ORR were observed between the two treatment arms. Treatment-related toxicity was higher in the GET arm.

Cisplatin and gemcitabine first-line chemotherapy followed by maintenance gemcitabine or best supportive care in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a phase III trial.

PURPOSE: The primary objective of this randomized phase III study was to show significant difference in median time to progression (TTP) in patients with advanced NSCLC treated with single-agent gemcitabine maintenance therapy versus best supportive care following gemcitabine plus cisplatin initial first-line therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Chemonaive patients with stage IIIB/IV NSCLC received gemcitabine 1,250 mg/m(2) (days 1 and 8) plus cisplatin 80 mg/m(2) (day 1) every 21 days. Patients achieving objective response or disease stabilization following initial gemcitabine plus cisplatin therapy were randomized (2:1 fashion) to receive maintenance gemcitabine (1,250 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 every 21 days) plus best supportive care (GEM arm), or best supportive care only (BSC arm). RESULTS: Between November 1999 and November 2002, we enrolled 352 patients (median age: 57 years; stage IV disease: 74%; Karnofsky performance status (KPS) >80: 41%). Following initial therapy, 206 patients were randomized and treated with gemcitabine (138) or best supportive care (68). TTP throughout the study period was 6.6 and 5 months for GEM and BSC arms, respectively, while values for the maintenance period were 3.6 and 2.0 months (for p < 0.001 for both). Median overall survival (OS) throughout study was 13.0 months for GEM and 11.0 months for BSC arms (p = 0.195). The toxicity profile was mild, with neutropenia being most common grade 3/4 toxicities. CONCLUSION: Maintenance therapy with gemcitabine, following initial therapy with gemcitabine plus cisplatin, was feasible, and produced significantly longer TTP compared to best supportive care alone. Further studies are warranted to establish the place of maintenance chemotherapy in patients with advanced NSCLC.

Fluoxetine in the acute treatment and relapse prevention of combat-related post-traumatic stress disorder: Analysis of the veteran group of a placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial.

The efficacy and safety of fluoxetine (20-80 mg) was compared with placebo in 144 veterans [36.2 years], diagnosed with combat-related post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) selected from a 12-week acute and 24-week relapse prevention PTSD trial. In the acute phase, improvements were greater with fluoxetine than placebo in the disease-specific outcome measures: Treatment Outcome PTSD (TOP-8) total scores (SE):-9.05 (0.90) and -5.20 (1.23), p = 0.001; Clinician Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS) total scores:-31.12 (2.72) and -16.07 (4.24), p < 0.001; all CAPS subscores; Davidson Trauma Scale (DTS) total scores; and other general outcome measures. In the maintenance phase, fluoxetine was superior to placebo in sustaining improvement in TOP-8 [-1.01 (0.91) and 1.56 (0.95)] and CAPS [-4.93 (3.54) and 5.48 (3.66)]. The risk of relapse in the placebo arm was significantly greater than in the fluoxetine arm (log-rank test chi 2 = 4.090, df = 1, p = 0.048). Fluoxetine was well tolerated at a mean daily dose of 65 mg.

Necitumumab plus Gemcitabine and Cisplatin as First-Line Therapy in Patients with Stage IV EGFR- Expressing Squamous Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: German Subgroup Data from an Open-Label, Randomized Controlled Phase 3 Study (SQUIRE).

BACKGROUND: In the SQUIRE study, adding the anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) IgG1 antibody necitumumab to first-line gemcitabine and cisplatin (GC + N) in advanced squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (sqNSCLC) significantly improved overall survival (OS); the safety profile was acceptable. We explored data for the German subpopulation (N = 96) of SQUIRE patients with EGFR-expressing tumors. PATIENT AND METHODS: Patients with stage IV sqNSCLC were randomized 1:1 to up to 6 cycles of open-label GC + N or GC alone. GC + N patients with no progression continued on necitumumab monotherapy until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. The primary endpoint was OS; the secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), safety and health-related quality of life (EQ-5D, Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS)). RESULTS: The 96 German SQUIRE patients with EGFR-expressing tumors (GC + N 42, GC 54) received a median of 4 GC cycles; the GC + N patients received 5 cycles of necitumumab. Adding necitumumab was associated with 41% risk reduction of death (hazard ratio (HR) 0.59, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.37-0.94, p = 0.026) and 44% risk reduction of progression (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.33-0.95, p = 0.029). Adverse events typically associated with EGFR antibody treatment (including rash, hypomagnesemia) were more common with GC + N. The time to deterioration of the EQ-5D and LCSS scores showed no notable differences between the treatment arms, except for appetite loss (delayed for GC + N). CONCLUSION: The survival benefit from adding necitumumab to first-line GC was more pronounced in the German SQUIRE subpopulation with EGFR-expressing tumors than in the overall (intention-to-treat) population; toxicity was manageable and consistent with the overall population.