Impact of hand-foot skin reaction on treatment outcome in patients receiving capecitabine plus erlotinib for advanced pancreatic cancer: a subgroup analysis from AIO-PK0104.

BACKGROUND: Drug-induced skin toxicity may correlate with treatment efficacy in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy or biological agents. The correlation of the capecitabine-associated hand-foot skin reaction (HFS) on outcome parameters in pancreatic cancer (PC) has not yet been investigated. METHODS: Within the multicentre phase III AIO-PK0104 trial, patients with confirmed advanced PC were randomly assigned to first-line treatment with either capecitabine plus erlotinib (150 mg/day, arm A) or gemcitabine plus erlotinib (150 mg/day, arm B). A cross-over to either gemcitabine (arm A) or capecitabine (arm B) was performed after failure of the first-line regimen. Data on skin toxicity were correlated with efficacy study endpoints using uni- and multivariate analyses. To control for guarantee-time bias (GTB), we focused on subgroup analyses of patients who had completed two and three or more treatment cycles. RESULTS: Of 281 randomised patients, skin toxicity data were available for 255 patients. Median time to capecitabine-attributed HFS was two cycles, 36 of 47 (77%) HFS events had been observed by the end of treatment cycle three. Considering HFS during first-line treatment in 101 patients treated with capecitabine for at least two cycles within the capecitabine plus erlotinib arm, time to treatment failure after first- and second-line therapy (TTF2) and overall survival (OS) both were significantly prolonged for the 44 patients (44%) with HFS compared to 57 patients without HFS (56%) (TTF2: 7.8 vs. 3.8 months, HR 0.50, p = 0.001; OS: 10.4 vs. 5.9 months, HR 0.55, p = 0.005). A subgroup analysis of 70 patients on treatment with capecitabine for at least three cycles showed similar results (TTF2: 8.3 vs. 4.4 months, HR 0.53, p = 0.010; OS: 10.4 vs. 6.7 months, HR 0.62, p = 0.056). CONCLUSION: The present subgroup analysis from AIO-PK0104 suggests that HFS may serve as an independent clinical predictor for treatment outcome in capecitabine-treated patients with advanced PC.

pERK, pAKT and p53 as tissue biomarkers in erlotinib-treated patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: a translational subgroup analysis from AIO-PK0104.

BACKGROUND: The role of pERK, pAKT and p53 as biomarkers in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer has not yet been defined. METHODS: Within the phase III study AIO-PK0104 281 patients with advanced pancreatic cancer received an erlotinib-based 1st-line regimen. Archival tissue from 153 patients was available for central immunohistochemistry staining for pERK, pAKT and p53. Within a subgroup analysis, biomarker data were correlated with efficacy endpoints and skin rash using a Cox regression model. RESULTS: Fifty-five out of 153 patients were classified as pERKlow and 98 patients as pERKhigh; median overall survival (OS) was 6.2 months and 5.7 months, respectively (HR 1.29, p = 0.16). When analysing pERK as continuous variable, the pERK score was significantly associated with OS (HR 1.06, 95% CI 1.0-1.12, p = 0.05). Twenty-one of 35 patients were pAKTlow and 14/35 pAKThigh with a corresponding median OS of 6.4 months and 6.8 months, respectively (HR 1.03, p = 0.93). Four out of 50 patients had a complete loss of p53 expression, 20 patients a regular expression and 26 patients had tumors with p53 overexpression. The p53 status had no impact on OS (p = 0.91); however, a significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) (6.0 vs 1.8 months, HR 0.24, p = 0.02) and a higher rate of skin rash (84% vs 25%, p = 0.02) was observed for patients with a regular p53 expression compared to patients with a complete loss of p53. CONCLUSION: pERK expression may have an impact on OS in erlotinib-treated patients with advanced pancreatic cancer; p53 should be further investigated for its potential role as a predictive marker for PFS and skin rash. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00440167 (registration date: February 22, 2007).

Gemcitabine plus erlotinib followed by capecitabine versus capecitabine plus erlotinib followed by gemcitabine in advanced pancreatic cancer: final results of a randomised phase 3 trial of the 'Arbeitsgemeinschaft Internistische Onkologie' (AIO-PK0104).

OBJECTIVE: AIO-PK0104 investigated two treatment strategies in advanced pancreatic cancer (PC): a reference sequence of gemcitabine/erlotinib followed by 2nd-line capecitabine was compared with a reverse experimental sequence of capecitabine/erlotinib followed by gemcitabine. METHODS: 281 patients with PC were randomly assigned to 1st-line treatment with either gemcitabine plus erlotinib or capecitabine plus erlotinib. In case of treatment failure (eg, disease progression or toxicity), patients were allocated to 2nd-line treatment with the comparator cytostatic drug without erlotinib. The primary study endpoint was time to treatment failure (TTF) after 1st- and 2nd-line therapy (TTF2; non-inferiority design). KRAS exon 2 mutations were analysed in archival tumour tissue from 173 of the randomised patients. RESULTS: Of the 274 eligible patients, 43 had locally advanced and 231 had metastatic disease; 140 (51%) received 2nd-line chemotherapy. Median TTF2 was estimated with 4.2 months in both arms; median overall survival was 6.2 months with gemcitabine/erlotinib followed by capecitabine and 6.9 months with capecitabine/erlotinib followed by gemcitabine, respectively (HR 1.02, p=0.90). TTF for 1st-line therapy (TTF1) was significantly prolonged with gemcitabine/erlotinib compared to capecitabine/erlotinib (3.2 vs 2.2 months; HR 0.69, p=0.0034). Skin rash was associated with both TTF2 (rash grade 0/1/2-4:2.9/4.3/6.7 months, p<0.0001) and survival (3.4/7.0/9.6 months, p<0.0001). Each arm showed a safe and manageable toxicity profile during 1st- and 2nd-line therapy. A KRAS wild-type status (52/173 patients, 30%) was associated with an improved overall survival (HR 1.68, p=0.005). CONCLUSION: Both treatment strategies are feasible and demonstrated comparable efficacy; KRAS may serve as biomarker in patients with advanced PC treated with erlotinib.

Lenalidomide, bendamustine and prednisolone exhibits a favourable safety and efficacy profile in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma: final results of a phase 1 clinical trial OSHO - #077.

This phase 1 dose finding study tested a combination of lenalidomide, bendamustine and prednisolone (RBP) in 21 patients in five cohorts with advanced multiple relasped/refractory myeloma (MM) to determine the maximum tolerable dose (MTD) of the combination. The first cohort received a starting dose of lenalidomide 10 mg/d, days 1-21, bendamustine 60 mg/m(2) /d, days 1-2, and prednisolone 100 mg/d, days 1-4. Dose escalation was done in cohorts of three to six patients with lenalidomide dose increasing to 15, 20 and 25 mg, and after reaching 25 mg/d, bendamustine was increased to 75 mg/m(2) . A total of 21 patients were enrolled and all completed at least two cycles. Two patients developed dose-limiting haemotoxicity: one patient on lenalidomide 25 mg/d and bendamustine 60 mg/m(2) and another patient at the highest dose level (lenalidomide 25 mg/d and bendamustine 75 mg/m(2) ). The MTD was not reached. Sixteen patients (76%) responded after at least two cycles of RBP with one stringent complete response (CR), one near CR, five very good partial response and nine partial response. After a median observation time of 16 months, progression-free survival at 18 months was 48% and overall survival was 64%. In conclusion, RBP with lenalidomide 25 mg/d, days 1-21 and bendamustine 75 mg/m(2) days 1-2 is well tolerated in patients with relapsed/refractory MM.

Erlotinib 150 mg daily plus chemotherapy in advanced pancreatic cancer: an interim safety analysis of a multicenter, randomized, cross-over phase III trial of the 'Arbeitsgemeinschaft Internistische Onkologie'.

To date, only limited toxicity data are available for the combination of erlotinib with either capecitabine or gemcitabine as front-line therapy for advanced pancreatic cancer. Within a randomized phase III trial, 281 treatment-naive patients were randomly assigned between capecitabine (2000 mg/m/day, for 14 days, once every 3 weeks) plus erlotinib (150 mg/day, arm A) and gemcitabine (1000 mg/m as a 30-min infusion) plus erlotinib (150 mg/day, arm B). In case of treatment failure, patients were crossed over to a second-line treatment with the comparator cytostatic drug without erlotinib. The primary study endpoint was the time to treatment failure of second-line therapy (TTF2). This interim analysis of toxicity contains safety data from the first 127 randomized patients. During first-line therapy, patients received a median number of three treatment cycles (range 0-13) in both the arms. Regarding chemotherapy, a treatment delay was observed in 12% of the cycles in arm A and in 22% of the cycles in arm B. Dose reductions of the cytostatic drug were performed in 18 and 27% of treatment cycles, respectively. Erlotinib dose reductions were performed in 6 and 11% of all cycles. Grade 3/4 hematological toxicity was <10% in both the arms; major grade 3/4 toxicities in arms A and B were diarrhea (9 vs. 7%), skin rash (4 vs. 12%), and hand-foot syndrome (7 vs. 0%). No treatment-related death was observed. In conclusion, this interim safety analysis suggests that treatment with erlotinib 150 mg/day is feasible in combination with capecitabine or gemcitabine.

Lenalidomide in combination with bendamustine and prednisolone in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: results of a phase 2 clinical trial (OSHO-#077).

INTRODUCTION: While lenalidomide monotherapy is established for relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (MM) treatment, combination therapies including lenalidomide are still under investigation in a number of phase 2/3 studies. In the current study, a treatment regime of lenalidomide (Revlimid®), bendamustine and prednisolone (RBP) was tested in patients with relapsed/refractory MM. METHODS: In the previously completed phase 1 study RBP with a dose of 75 mg/m2 bendamustine days 1-2, prednisolone 100 mg days 1-4 and 25 mg lenalidomide days 1-21 was well tolerated. RESULTS: Between July 2011 and September 2013, 25 patients were included in this analysis. The median number of previous treatments was 1 (range 1-2). Twenty-two patients (88%) responded after at least two cycles of RBP (one sCR, five nCR, eight VGPR and eight PR). The median time to first haematological response was 28 days, and median time to best response was 56 days. Due to increased haematological toxicity a dose reduction in most patients required in subsequent cycles of therapy. The median progression-free and overall survival was 22 and 38 months, respectively. In conclusion RBP is a highly effective therapy for patients with relapsed/refractory MM. In contrast to our phase 1 study, dose reduction was necessary in many patients because of haematological toxicity.

Bendamustine and prednisone in combination with bortezomib (BPV) in the treatment of patients with newly diagnosed/untreated multiple myeloma.

INTRODUCTION: Bortezomib is a proteasome inhibitor that has shown important clinical efficacy either as a single agent or in combination in patients with multiple myeloma (MM). In the present protocol, bortezomib was combined with bendamustine and prednisone, in order to assess the efficacy and safety of this combination therapy in patients with newly diagnosed/untreated MM. METHODS: Between June 2006 and October 2013, 49 patients with newly diagnosed/untreated MM were treated with bendamustine 60 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 2, bortezomib 1.3 mg/m(2) on days 1, 4, 8 and 11, and prednisone 100 mg on days 1, 2, 4, 8 and 11 bendamustine, prednisone and bortezomib (BPV) once every 21 days. Patients were divided into three groups: group A (n = 19) consisted of patients with normal renal function or mild dysfunction (eGFR ≥ 60 ml/min), group B (n = 15) patients with moderate or severe renal dysfunction (eGFR 15-59 ml/min) and group C (n = 15) patients with renal failure/dialysis (eGFR <15 ml/min). RESULTS: A median number of two (range 1-5) BPV treatment cycles were given to the patients. The majority of the patients (n = 40, 82 %) responded after at least one cycle of BPV therapy with five stringent complete responses (CRs), nine near complete responses, 12 very good partial responses and 14 partial responses. Five patients had MR, three stable and one progressive disease. After a median observation time of 13 months, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) at 12 months were 92 and 94 %, respectively, for patients with normal renal function or mild renal dysfunction (group A) and 83 and 93 %, respectively, for patients with moderate or severe renal dysfunction (group B). Outcome for these patients was slightly better but not statistically significantly better than that for patients with renal failure/dialysis (group C), who had a PFS, and OS of 66 % (p = 0.08) and 73 % (p = 0.05), respectively. These results indicate that this BPV combination is feasible, effective and well tolerated in patients with newly diagnosed MM and normal or impaired renal function.

Successful treatment of patients with newly diagnosed/untreated multiple myeloma and advanced renal failure using bortezomib in combination with bendamustine and prednisone.

PURPOSE: Renal failure is a frequent complication of multiple myeloma (MM) and, if present at diagnosis, a considerable risk factor for outcome. Treatment with chemotherapy and/or new agents may result in recovery of renal function in up to 50 % of patients. The window of opportunity to reverse renal impairment is, however, rather small, making an immediate and highly active treatment strategy mandatory. Bortezomib as well as bendamustine has been demonstrated to be potent drugs in the treatment of MM. METHODS: A total of 18 patients with newly diagnosed/untreated MM and renal insufficiency (GFR < 35 ml/min) were treated with bendamustine, prednisone, and bortezomib (BPV). RESULTS: The majority of them (n = 15; 83 %) responded after at least one cycle of chemotherapy with three sCR, five nCR, five VGPR, and two PR. With a median follow-up of 17 months, PFS at 18 months was 57 % and OS was 61 %. The myeloma protein decreased rapidly, reaching the best response after the first cycle in four and after the second cycle in additional seven patients. Thirteen patients (72 %) improved their renal function after treatment. CONCLUSION: We conclude that the combination of bortezomib, bendamustine, and prednisone is effective and well tolerated in patients with a newly diagnosed MM and renal failure.