Lunchbox trial: A randomized phase III trial of cisplatin and irradiation followed by carboplatin and paclitaxel versus sandwich therapy of carboplatin and paclitaxel followed by irradiation then carboplatin and paclitaxel for advanced endometrial carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The objective was to compare sequencing strategies for treatment of advanced endometrial carcinoma. METHODS: Patients were eligible if they had FIGO 2009 Stage III or IVA endometrial carcinoma or Stage I or II serous or clear cell endometrial carcinoma and positive cytology. Patients were randomized to: Cisplatin 50 mg/m2 IV Days 1 and 29 plus radiation followed by Carboplatin AUC 5 or 6 plus Paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 q 21 days for 4 cycles (chemoRT then chemo) vs. Carboplatin AUC 6 plus Paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 q 21 days for 3 cycles followed by radiation followed by Carboplatin AUC 5 or 6 plus Paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 q 21 days for 3 cycles (sandwich therapy). Futility analysis was planned. The primary objective was to determine if chemoRT then chemo improves recurrence-free survival (RFS) compared to sandwich therapy. RESULTS: Of the 48 patients enrolled at 8 sites, 42 patients were eligible for futility analysis, and the trial was closed early. The median follow-up was 30.9 months. The 3-year RFS was 85.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 62 to 95) in the chemoRT then chemo arm and 73.4% (95% CI, 43 to 89) in the sandwich therapy group (p = 0.58). The 3-year overall survival (OS) was 88.4% (95% CI, 61 to 97) in the chemoRT then chemo arm and 80.9% (95% CI, 51 to 93) in the sandwich therapy group (p = 0.55). CONCLUSION: There was no observed significant difference between chemoRT then chemo compared to sandwich therapy in terms of RFS, OS, or adverse events, although the trial was underpowered and closed early due to low accrual.

Regorafenib in Patients With Solid Tumors With BRAF Alterations: Results From the Targeted Agent and Profiling Utilization Registry (TAPUR) Study.

PURPOSE: Targeted Agent and Profiling Utilization Registry is a phase II basket trial evaluating the antitumor activity of commercially available targeted agents in patients with advanced cancer with genomic alterations known to be drug targets. Results of a cohort of patients with solid tumors with BRAF alterations treated with regorafenib are reported. METHODS: Eligible patients had measurable disease (RECIST v.1.1), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1, adequate organ function, and no standard treatment options. The primary end point was disease control (DC), defined as investigator assessment of patients with complete or partial response (PR) or stable disease of at least 16-weeks duration (SD16+). Low accruing histology-specific cohorts with BRAF alterations treated with regorafenib were collapsed into a single histology-pooled cohort for this analysis. The results were evaluated on the basis of a one-sided exact binomial test with a null DC rate of 15% versus 35% (power, 0.84; α, .10). Secondary end points were objective response (OR), progression-free survival, overall survival, duration of response, duration of stable disease, and safety. RESULTS: Twenty-eight patients with 12 tumor types with BRAF alterations were enrolled from June 2016 to June 2021. All patients were evaluable for efficacy. Two patients with PR and four with SD16+ were observed for DC and OR rates of 21% (90% CI, 12 to 100) and 7% (95% CI, 1 to 24), respectively. The null hypothesis of 15% DC rate was not rejected (P = .24). Eight patients had at least one grade 3 adverse event or serious adverse event at least possibly related to regorafenib. CONCLUSION: Regorafenib did not meet prespecified criteria to declare a signal of activity in patients with solid tumors with BRAF alterations.

Olaparib With or Without Cediranib Versus Platinum-Based Chemotherapy in Recurrent Platinum-Sensitive Ovarian Cancer (NRG-GY004): A Randomized, Open-Label, Phase III Trial.

PURPOSE: Platinum-based chemotherapy is the standard of care for platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer, but complications from repeated platinum therapy occur. We assessed the activity of two all-oral nonplatinum alternatives, olaparib or olaparib/cediranib, versus platinum-based chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: NRG-GY004 is an open-label, randomized, phase III trial conducted in the United States and Canada. Eligible patients had high-grade serous or endometrioid platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to platinum-based chemotherapy, olaparib, or olaparib/cediranib. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) in the intention-to-treat population. Secondary end points included activity within germline BRCA-mutated or wild-type subgroups and patient-reported outcomes (PROs). RESULTS: Between February 04, 2016, and November 13, 2017, 565 eligible patients were randomly assigned. Median PFS was 10.3 (95% CI, 8.7 to 11.2), 8.2 (95% CI, 6.6 to 8.7), and 10.4 (95% CI, 8.5 to 12.5) months with chemotherapy, olaparib, and olaparib/cediranib, respectively. Olaparib/cediranib did not improve PFS versus chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR] 0.86; 95% CI, 0.66 to 1.10; P = .077). In women with germline BRCA mutation, the PFS HR versus chemotherapy was 0.55 (95% CI, 0.32 to 0.94) for olaparib/cediranib and 0.63 (95% CI, 0.37 to 1.07) for olaparib. In women without a germline BRCA mutation, the PFS HR versus chemotherapy was 0.97 (95% CI, 0.73 to 1.30) for olaparib/cediranib and 1.41 (95% CI, 1.07 to 1.86) for olaparib. Hematologic adverse events occurred more commonly with chemotherapy; however, nonhematologic adverse events were higher with olaparib/cediranib. In 489 patients evaluable for PROs, patients receiving olaparib/cediranib scored on average 1.1 points worse on the NFOSI-DRS-P subscale (97.5% CI, -2.0 to -0.2, P = .0063) versus chemotherapy; no difference between olaparib and chemotherapy was observed. CONCLUSION: Combination olaparib/cediranib did not improve PFS compared with chemotherapy and resulted in reduced PROs. Notably, in patients with a germline BRCA mutation, both olaparib and olaparib/cediranib had significant clinical activity.

A Gynecologic Oncology Group phase II trial of the protein kinase C-beta inhibitor, enzastaurin and evaluation of markers with potential predictive and prognostic value in persistent or recurrent epithelial ovarian and primary peritoneal malignancies.

OBJECTIVES: Protein kinase C (PKC) activation contributes to proliferation and angiogenesis in epithelial ovarian or primary peritoneal carcinoma (EOC/PPC). A multi-institutional phase II trial was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of PKCß inhibitor enzastaurin in persistent or recurrent EOC/PPC and to explore potential prognostic and predictive biomarkers. METHODS: Eligible women with measurable platinum-sensitive and resistant EOC/PPC were treated with continuous administration of oral enzastaurin until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. A two-stage sequential design was used to evaluate progression-free survival (PFS) ≥6-months, tumor response, and toxicity. Translational studies included sequencing of the TP53, PTEN, PIK3CA and PKCßII genes for somatic mutations, quantitative PCR assays for AKT2 and PTEN copy number alterations, and measurement of circulating VEGF-A plasma levels. RESULTS: Among 27 eligible and evaluable patients, 3 women with PFS≥6-months (11%) and 2 women with partial responses (7%) were observed. One of them achieved a durable response and remains on the study. No grade 4 adverse events were observed. Most common grade 3 adverse events were constitutional (4) and gastrointestinal (3). Mutations in the TP53 gene and abnormal copy number in the PTEN gene were common (56% and 48% of cases, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Enzastaurin was tolerable but had insufficient activity to proceed with the second stage of accrual. However, 1 patient has been progression-free for 44 months. No association between a biomarker and response to enzastaurin has been found. Exploratory analysis suggested an association between survival and PTEN copy number losses.

Single agent carboplatin versus carboplatin plus pegylated liposomal doxorubicin in recurrent ovarian cancer: final survival results of a SWOG (S0200) phase 3 randomized trial.

OBJECTIVES: Randomized phase 3 trials have demonstrated the utility of a regimen of carboplatin plus pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) in recurrent ovarian cancer, and have provided provocative data suggesting a substantially lower risk of carboplatin-associated hypersensitivity if PDL is delivered in combination with the platinum agent. METHODS: To further examine both of these clinically-relevant issues, the survival outcome (with longer follow-up) and hypersensitivity reaction profile of a previously reported phase 3 trial that compared single agent carboplatin (AUC 5) to carboplatin (AUC 5) plus PLD (30 mg/m(2)) delivered on an every 4-week schedule in recurrent ovarian cancer (SWOG 0200) were re-analyzed. RESULTS: In the limited number of patients (n=61) entered into this phase 3 study before closure by the SWOG Data Safety and Monitoring Committee due to insufficient accrual, there was an initially reported improvement in outcome associated with the combination regimen. With longer follow-up and additional events there is still a statistically-significant improved progression-free survival (median: 12 versus 8 months, p=0.02), but the previously observed impact of the two-drug regimen on overall survival is no longer apparent (median: 31 versus 18 months; p=0.2). While no hypersensitivity reactions were reported in the carboplatin plus PLD arm (0/31), 9 of 30 patients (30%) of women randomized to single agent carboplatin experienced an allergic episode (p=0.0008), with 5 being >grade 2 in severity. CONCLUSION: Despite a favorable impact of carboplatin and PLD on progression-free survival in this trial, the effect on overall survival is not statistically significant. For currently unknown reasons, administering PLD with carboplatin appears to substantially reduce the incidence of platinum-associated hypersensitivity reactions.

Randomized trial of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) plus carboplatin versus carboplatin in platinum-sensitive (PS) patients with recurrent epithelial ovarian or peritoneal carcinoma after failure of initial platinum-based chemotherapy (Southwest Oncology Group Protocol S0200).

OBJECTIVE: Because debate continues over the role of combination, platinum-based chemotherapy for platinum-sensitive (PS), recurrent ovarian cancer (OC), we compared overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), confirmed complete response rate and time to treatment failure in this population. METHODS: Patients with recurrent stage III or IV OC, a progression-free and platinum-free interval of 6-24 months after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy and up to 12 courses of a non-platinum containing consolidation treatment were eligible. Patients were randomized to i.v. pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) (30 mg/m2) plus i.v. carboplatin (AUC=5 mg/mL min) once every 4 weeks (PLD arm) or i.v. carboplatin alone (AUC=5 mg/mL min) once every 4 weeks. RESULTS: The PLD arm enrolled 31 patients and the carboplatin alone arm 30 for a total of 61 patients out of 900 planned. Response rates were 67% for the PLD arm and 32% for the carboplatin only arm (Fisher's exact p=0.02). The estimated median PFS was 12 and 8 months for PLD versus carboplatin alone. The estimated median OS on the PLD arm was 26 months and 18 months on the carboplatin only arm (p=0.02). Twenty-six percent of the patients on the PLD arm reported grade 4 toxicities, all hematological in nature. CONCLUSION: This study was closed early because of slow patient accrual. The response rate, median PFS and OS results are intriguing. These data suggest that there may be an advantage to the PLD plus carboplatin combination treatment in patients with PS, recurrent OC. The regimen should be further tested.