A Phase 1b Study of Lenvatinib plus Pembrolizumab in Patients with Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Extended Analysis of Study 116.

Introduction: Lenvatinib (dosing for patients who weigh ≥60 kg was 12 mg/day; for patients who weigh <60 kg, the dose was 8 mg/day) plus pembrolizumab 200 mg once every 3 weeks demonstrated antitumor activity and a manageable safety profile in patients with first-line unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC) in the open-label phase 1b Study 116/KEYNOTE-524 (primary analysis data cutoff date: October 31, 2019; median follow-up: 10.6 months). This analysis (updated data cutoff date: March 31, 2021) reports efficacy results from 17 months of additional follow-up time. Methods: 100 patients with uHCC were included in the primary analysis (median follow-up: 27.6 months). Endpoints included overall survival (OS), investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and duration of response (DOR) per modified RECIST. Landmark analyses of OS by the best response at 3 and 9 months were performed. Pembrolizumab antidrug antibodies (ADAs) and concentrations were also measured (cutoff date: August 7, 2020). Results: ORR was 43.0% (95% CI 33.1-53.3%) and median DOR was 17.1 months (95% CI 6.9-19.3 months). Median PFS and OS were 9.3 months (95% CI 7.4-9.8 months) and 20.4 months (95% CI 14.4-25.9 months), respectively. No treatment-emergent ADAs were detected. Conclusion: Results show a sustained treatment effect with lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab in patients with uHCC in the first-line setting.

Characterization and Management of Adverse Reactions in Patients With Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treated With Lenvatinib.

Aims: Advanced practice providers (APPs) play a vital role in monitoring for and managing adverse reactions (ARs). As lenvatinib ARs can resemble cirrhosis (commonly presenting with hepatocellular carcinoma [HCC]), APP input is important for timely detection and management of ARs and to promote medication adherence. Design: The goal of this post-hoc analysis of the REFLECT trial was to characterize key ARs associated with lenvatinib, and to discuss management strategies. Methods: In REFLECT, patients with unresectable HCC were randomized to either daily lenvatinib (12 mg/day for patients who weighed ≥ 60 kg or 8 mg/day for those < 60 kg) or sorafenib 400 mg twice daily. Adverse events in the lenvatinib arm were grouped into ARs (hypertension, fatigue, palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome, proteinuria, and decreased appetite) per the United States Prescribing Information (USPI) for lenvatinib. Results: Key ARs in the lenvatinib arm (n = 476) generally occurred within months of starting lenvatinib. Some cases of proteinuria, decreased appetite, and diarrhea were first reported at about 2 years of treatment. Conclusions: The onset of key ARs associated with lenvatinib treatment can be predicted and generally be managed (per the lenvatinib USPI and REFLECT) by withholding lenvatinib and resuming it at a reduced dose after the severity decreases. However, lenvatinib should generally be discontinued if the AR is life-threatening.

Quality of life assessment of cabozantinib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in the CELESTIAL trial.

BACKGROUND: The CELESTIAL trial (NCT01908426) demonstrated overall survival benefit for cabozantinib versus placebo in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC) who had received prior sorafenib treatment. This analysis of CELESTIAL compared the impact of cabozantinib versus placebo on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Health status was assessed using the EuroQol five-dimension five-level (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire over the 800-day follow-up period. EQ-5D-5L health states were mapped to health utility scores using reference values for the UK population. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were calculated for each treatment group as the area under the curve for the plot of health utility score over time. The between-treatment group difference in restricted mean QALYs was calculated by generalized linear models and adjusted for baseline differences. A difference of 0.08 in health utility score (or in QALY) was deemed a minimally important difference and to be clinically significant. RESULTS: At week 5, the difference in mean health utility score between cabozantinib and placebo was -0.097 (95% confidence interval [95% CI]: -0.126, -0.067; p ≤ 0.001). Between-group differences in health utility scores diminished over time and were generally non-significant. The cabozantinib group accrued more QALYs than the placebo group over follow-up. Differences in mean QALYs (cabozantinib minus placebo) were statistically and clinically significant, ranging from +0.092 (95% CI: 0.016, 0.169) to +0.185 (95% CI: 0.126, 0.243) in favour of cabozantinib, depending on the reference value set used. CONCLUSIONS: These HRQoL findings support a positive benefit-risk profile for cabozantinib in previously treated patients with aHCC.

Pharmacodynamic Biomarkers Predictive of Survival Benefit with Lenvatinib in Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma: From the Phase III REFLECT Study.

PURPOSE: In REFLECT, lenvatinib demonstrated an effect on overall survival (OS) by confirmation of noninferiority to sorafenib in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. This analysis assessed correlations between serum or tissue biomarkers and efficacy outcomes from REFLECT. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Serum biomarkers (VEGF, ANG2, FGF19, FGF21, and FGF23) were measured by ELISA. Gene expression in tumor tissues was measured by the nCounter PanCancer Pathways Panel. Pharmacodynamic changes in serum biomarker levels from baseline, and associations of clinical outcomes with baseline biomarker levels, were evaluated. RESULTS: Four hundred and seven patients were included in the serum analysis set (lenvatinib n = 279, sorafenib n = 128); 58 patients were included in the gene-expression analysis set (lenvatinib n = 34, sorafenib n = 24). Both treatments were associated with increases in VEGF; only lenvatinib was associated with increases in FGF19 and FGF23 at all time points. Lenvatinib-treated responders had greater increases in FGF19 and FGF23 versus nonresponders at cycle 4, day 1 (FGF19: 55.2% vs. 18.3%, P = 0.014; FGF23: 48.4% vs. 16.4%, P = 0.0022, respectively). Higher baseline VEGF, ANG2, and FGF21 correlated with shorter OS in both treatment groups. OS was longer for lenvatinib than sorafenib [median, 10.9 vs. 6.8 months, respectively; HR, 0.53; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.33-0.85; P-interaction = 0.0397] with higher baseline FGF21. In tumor tissue biomarker analysis, VEGF/FGF-enriched groups showed improved OS with lenvatinib versus the intermediate VEGF/FGF group (HR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.16-0.91; P = 0.0253). CONCLUSIONS: Higher baseline levels of VEGF, FGF21, and ANG2 may be prognostic for shorter OS. Higher baseline FGF21 may be predictive for longer OS with lenvatinib compared with sorafenib, but this needs confirmation.

Second-line cabozantinib after sorafenib treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a subgroup analysis of the phase 3 CELESTIAL trial.

OBJECTIVE: In the phase 3 CELESTIAL trial, cabozantinib improved overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) compared with placebo in patients with previously treated advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This subgroup analysis evaluated cabozantinib in patients who had received sorafenib as the only prior systemic therapy. METHODS: CELESTIAL randomised (2:1) patients with advanced HCC and Child-Pugh class A liver function to treatment with cabozantinib (60 mg daily) or placebo. Eligibility required prior treatment with sorafenib, and patients could have received ≤2 prior systemic regimens. The primary endpoint was OS. Outcomes in patients who had received sorafenib as the only prior therapy were analysed by duration of prior sorafenib (<3 months, 3 to <6 months and ≥6 months). RESULTS: Of patients who had received only prior sorafenib, 331 were randomised to cabozantinib and 164 to placebo; 136 patients had received sorafenib for <3 months, 141 for 3 to <6 months and 217 for ≥6 months. Cabozantinib improved OS relative to placebo in the overall second-line population who had received only prior sorafenib (median 11.3 vs 7.2 months; HR=0.70, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.88). This improvement was maintained in analyses by prior sorafenib duration with longer duration generally corresponding to longer median OS-median OS 8.9 vs 6.9 months (HR=0.72, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.10) for prior sorafenib <3 months, 11.5 vs 6.5 months (HR=0.65, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.00) for 3 to <6 months and 12.3 vs 9.2 months (HR=0.82, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.16) for ≥6 months. Cabozantinib also improved PFS in all duration subgroups. Safety data were consistent with the overall study population. CONCLUSION: Cabozantinib improved efficacy outcomes versus placebo in the second-line population who had received only prior sorafenib irrespective of duration of prior sorafenib treatment, further supporting the utility of cabozantinib in the evolving treatment landscape of HCC. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: NCT01908426.

Phase Ib Study of Lenvatinib Plus Pembrolizumab in Patients With Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

PURPOSE: The immunomodulatory effect of lenvatinib (a multikinase inhibitor) on tumor microenvironments may contribute to antitumor activity when combined with programmed death receptor-1 (PD-1) signaling inhibitors in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We report results from a phase Ib study of lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab (an anti-PD-1 antibody) in unresectable HCC (uHCC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this open-label multicenter study, patients with uHCC received lenvatinib (bodyweight ≥ 60 kg, 12 mg; < 60 kg, 8 mg) orally daily and pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously on day 1 of a 21-day cycle. The study included a dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) phase and an expansion phase (first-line patients). Primary objectives were safety/tolerability (DLT phase), and objective response rate (ORR) and duration of response (DOR) by modified RECIST (mRECIST) and RECIST version 1.1 (v1.1) per independent imaging review (IIR; expansion phase). RESULTS: A total of 104 patients were enrolled. No DLTs were reported (n = 6) in the DLT phase; 100 patients (expansion phase; included n = 2 from DLT phase) had received no prior systemic therapy and had Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage B (n = 29) or C disease (n = 71). At data cutoff, 37% of patients remained on treatment. Median duration of follow-up was 10.6 months (95% CI, 9.2 to 11.5 months). Confirmed ORRs by IIR were 46.0% (95% CI, 36.0% to 56.3%) per mRECIST and 36.0% (95% CI, 26.6% to 46.2%) per RECIST v1.1. Median DORs by IIR were 8.6 months (95% CI, 6.9 months to not estimable [NE]) per mRECIST and 12.6 months (95% CI, 6.9 months to NE) per RECIST v1.1. Median progression-free survival by IIR was 9.3 months per mRECIST and 8.6 months per RECIST v1.1. Median overall survival was 22 months. Grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 67% (grade 5, 3%) of patients. No new safety signals were identified. CONCLUSION: Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab has promising antitumor activity in uHCC. Toxicities were manageable, with no unexpected safety signals.

Randomised phase II trial (SWOG S1310) of single agent MEK inhibitor trametinib Versus 5-fluorouracil or capecitabine in refractory advanced biliary cancer.

BACKGROUND: The rationale for the evaluation of trametinib in advanced biliary cancer (BC) is based on the presence of mitogen-activated protein kinase alterations and on earlier promising results with MEK inhibitors in BC. METHODS: Patients with histologically proven BC who progressed on gemcitabine/platinum were randomised to trametinib daily (arm 1) versus fluoropyrimidine therapy (infusional 5-fluorouracil or oral capecitabine, arm 2). The primary end-point was overall survival (OS). Secondary end-points included progression free survival (PFS) and response rate. A planned interim futility analysis of objective response was performed on the first 14 patients registered to the trametinib arm. RESULTS: The study was stopped early based on the lack of measurable response in the trametinib arm. A total of 44 eligible patients were randomised (24 patients in arm 1 and 20 patients in arm 2). Median age was 62 years and the primary sites of tumour were cholangiocarcinoma (68%) and gallbladder (32%). The overall response rate was 8% (95% CI 0%-19%) in arm 1 versus 10% (95% CI 0%-23%) in arm 2 (p > .99) Median OS was 4.3 months for arm 1 and 6.6 months for arm 2. The median PFS was 1.4 months for arm 1 and 3.3 months for arm 2. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first prospective randomised study of a targeted agent versus chemotherapy for the second-line treatment of BC. In this unselected population, the interim analysis result of unlikely benefit with trametinib resulted in early closure.

Phase I Study of DSTP3086S, an Antibody-Drug Conjugate Targeting Six-Transmembrane Epithelial Antigen of Prostate 1, in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: Six-transmembrane epithelial antigen of the prostate 1 (STEAP1) is highly expressed in prostate cancers. DSTP3086S is a humanized immunoglobulin G1 anti-STEAP1 monoclonal antibody linked to the potent antimitotic agent monomethyl auristatin E. This study evaluated the safety and activity of DSTP3086S in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. METHODS: Patients were enrolled in a 3 + 3 dose escalation study to evaluate DSTP3086S (0.3 to 2.8 mg/kg intravenously) given once every 3 weeks followed by cohort expansion at the recommended phase II dose or weekly (0.8 to 1.0 mg/kg). RESULTS: Seventy-seven patients were given DSTP3086S once every 3 weeks, and seven were treated weekly. Two patients in the once-every-3-weeks dose escalation had dose-limiting grade 3 transaminitis. Grade 3 hyperglycemia and grade 4 hypophosphatemia were dose-limiting toxicities in one patient treated at 1.0 mg/kg weekly. Initial cohort expansion evaluated dosing at 2.8 mg/kg once every 3 weeks (n = 10), but frequent dose reductions led to testing of 2.4 mg/kg (n = 39) in the expansion phase. Common related adverse events (> 20%) across doses (once every 3 weeks) were fatigue, peripheral neuropathy, nausea, constipation, anorexia, diarrhea, and vomiting. DSTP3086S pharmacokinetics were linear. Among 62 patients who received > 2 mg/kg DSTP3086S once every 3 weeks, 11 (18%) demonstrated a ≥ 50% decline in prostate-specific antigen; two (6%) of 36 with measurable disease at baseline achieved a radiographic partial response; and of 27 patients with informative unfavorable baseline circulating tumor cells ≥ 5/7.5 mL of blood, 16 (59%) showed conversions to favorable circulating tumor cells < 5. No prostate-specific antigen or RECIST responses were seen with weekly dosing. CONCLUSION: DSTP3086S has acceptable safety at the recommended phase II dose level of 2.4 mg/kg once every 3 weeks. Antitumor activity at doses between 2.25 and 2.8 mg/kg once every 3 weeks supports the potential benefit of treating STEAP1-expressing metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer with an STEAP1-targeting antibody-drug conjugate.

INST OX-05-024: first line gemcitabine, oxaliplatin, and erlotinib for primary hepatocellular carcinoma and bile duct cancers: a multicenter Phase II trial.

Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC) incidence is increasing in the USA. Gemcitabine (G) and oxaliplatin (O) are active in HCC and biliary duct cancer (BDC). Erlotinib (E) is an EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) with known activity against both. We sought to evaluate the efficacy of the combination G+O+E. Patients with either of the two diagnosis were treated in a phase II trial. Simons 2 stage design was used. A disease-control rate (DCR), complete response (CR) + partial response (PR)+ stable disease (SD) at 24 weeks of ≤20% and >40% (P0 and P1 of 0.2 and 0.4, respectively) were set as undesirable (null) and desirable results. 26 HCC and 7 BDC patients were accrued. In HCC, 1 PR, 10 SD, and 9 PDs were seen. DCR in HCC was 42%. Among seven (7) patients with BDC, one patient was not evaluable; one achieved a long lasting PR, and five patients had SD and DCR was 86%. Median overall survival (OS) times and progression-free survivals (PFS) were 196 and 149 days in HCC and 238 days and not reached in BDC. PFS at 26 weeks in HCC was 41% and at 21 weeks in BDC was 60%. Grade 3 toxicities in >5% of patients were fatigue (12.9%), neutropenia (9.6%), thrombocytopenia (9.6%), and diarrhea (6.4%). G+O+E exceeded both preset P0a and P1 of the primary objective with a PFS of 41% at 26 weeks for HCC and preliminary BDC data may warrant further investigations.

Ramucirumab as second-line treatment in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma following first-line therapy with sorafenib: Patient-focused outcome results from the randomised phase III REACH study.

PURPOSE: To report patient-focused outcomes as measured by quality of life (QoL) and performance status (PS) in REACH, a phase III placebo-controlled randomised study, assessing ramucirumab in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients who received prior sorafenib. METHODS: Eligible patients had advanced HCC, Child-Pugh A, PS 0 or 1 and prior sorafenib. Patients received ramucirumab (8 mg/kg) or placebo (1:1) on day 1 of a 2-week cycle. QoL was assessed by FACT Hepatobiliary Symptom Index (FHSI)-8 and EuroQoL (EQ-5D) at baseline; cycles 4, 10, and 16; and end of treatment. PS was assessed at baseline, each cycle, and end of treatment. Deterioration in FHSI-8 was defined as a ≥3-point decrease from baseline and PS deterioration was defined as a change of ≥2. Both intention-to-treat and pre-specified subgroup of patients with baseline serum alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) ≥400 ng/mL were assessed. RESULTS: There were 565 patients randomised to ramucirumab and placebo. Compliance with FHSI and EQ-5D was high and similar between groups. In the ITT population, deterioration in FHSI-8, EQ-5D, and PS was similar between ramucirumab and placebo. In patients with baseline AFP ≥400 ng/mL, ramucirumab significantly reduced deterioration in FHSI-8 at the end of treatment compared with placebo (P = 0.0381), and there was a trend towards a delay in the deterioration of symptoms in FHSI-8 (HR 0.690; P = 0.054) and PS (HR 0.642; P = 0.057) in favour of ramucirumab. CONCLUSIONS: We report one of the most comprehensive data sets of QoL and symptom burden in patients undergoing systemic therapy for advanced HCC. Ramucirumab was associated with no worsening of QoL. In patients with baseline AFP ≥400 ng/mL, the significant survival benefit observed in patients treated with ramucirumab was coupled with a trend in patient-focused outcome benefits. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01140347.

Ramucirumab versus placebo as second-line treatment in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma following first-line therapy with sorafenib (REACH): a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: VEGF and VEGF receptor-2-mediated angiogenesis contribute to hepatocellular carcinoma pathogenesis. Ramucirumab is a recombinant IgG1 monoclonal antibody and VEGF receptor-2 antagonist. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of ramucirumab in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma following first-line therapy with sorafenib. METHODS: In this randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3 trial (REACH), patients were enrolled from 154 centres in 27 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had hepatocellular carcinoma with Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage C disease or stage B disease that was refractory or not amenable to locoregional therapy, had Child-Pugh A liver disease, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, had previously received sorafenib (stopped because of progression or intolerance), and had adequate haematological and biochemical parameters. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive intravenous ramucirumab (8 mg/kg) or placebo every 2 weeks, plus best supportive care, until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or death. Randomisation was stratified by geographic region and cause of liver disease with a stratified permuted block method. Patients, medical staff, investigators, and the funder were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01140347. FINDINGS: Between Nov 4, 2010, and April 18, 2013, 565 patients were enrolled, of whom 283 were assigned to ramucirumab and 282 were assigned to placebo. Median overall survival for the ramucirumab group was 9·2 months (95% CI 8·0-10·6) versus 7·6 months (6·0-9·3) for the placebo group (HR 0·87 [95% CI 0·72-1·05]; p=0·14). Grade 3 or greater adverse events occurring in 5% or more of patients in either treatment group were ascites (13 [5%] of 277 patients treated with ramucirumab vs 11 [4%] of 276 patients treated with placebo), hypertension (34 [12%] vs ten [4%]), asthenia (14 [5%] vs five [2%]), malignant neoplasm progression (18 [6%] vs 11 [4%]), increased aspartate aminotransferase concentration (15 [5%] vs 23 [8%]), thrombocytopenia (13 [5%] vs one [<1%]), hyperbilirubinaemia (three [1%] vs 13 [5%]), and increased blood bilirubin (five [2%] vs 14 [5%]). The most frequently reported (≥1%) treatment-emergent serious adverse event of any grade or grade 3 or more was malignant neoplasm progression. INTERPRETATION: Second-line treatment with ramucirumab did not significantly improve survival over placebo in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. No new safety signals were noted in eligible patients and the safety profile is manageable. FUNDING: Eli Lilly and Co.

Lenalidomide and rituximab in Waldenstrom's macroglobulinemia.

PURPOSE: Thalidomide and its more potent immunomodulatory derivative lenalidomide enhance rituximab-mediated antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity. We therefore evaluated lenalidomide and rituximab in symptomatic Waldenstrom's macroglobulinemia (WM) patients naive to either agent. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Intended therapy consisted of 48 weeks of lenalidomide (25 mg/d for 3 weeks and then 1 week off) along with rituximab (375 mg/m(2)/wk) dosed on weeks 2 to 5 and 13 to 16. Sixteen patients were enrolled, 12 of whom were previously untreated. RESULTS: Unexpectedly, we observed an acute decrease in hematocrit in 13 of 16 patients (median hematocrit decrease, 4.8%), which was attributable to lenalidomide patients and which led to cessation of further enrollment on this study. Lenalidomide-related anemia was observed even at doses as low as 5 mg/d and occurred in the absence of hemolysis or other cytopenias. The overall response and major response (<50% decrease in serum IgM) rates were 50% and 25%, respectively, on an intent-to-treat basis. With a median follow-up of 31.3 months, 4 of 8 responding patients have progressed with a median time to progression of 18.9 months. CONCLUSION: Lenalidomide produces unexpected but clinically significant acute anemia in patients with WM. In comparison with our previous study with thalidomide and rituximab in an analogous patient population, the responses achieved in WM patients with lenalidomide and rituximab appear less favorable.

Trastuzumab plus vinorelbine or taxane chemotherapy for HER2-overexpressing metastatic breast cancer: the trastuzumab and vinorelbine or taxane study.

BACKGROUND: The optimal trastuzumab-based chemotherapy regimen for HER2-overexpressing, metastatic breast cancer is not known. The trastuzumab and vinorelbine or taxane (TRAVIOTA) study was a prospective, multicenter, randomized trial that was designed to compare these regimens. METHODS: Eligible patients had HER2-overexpressing, metastatic breast cancer and had received no prior chemotherapy for advanced disease. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive either trastuzumab with weekly vinorelbine therapy or weekly taxane therapy (paclitaxel or docetaxel at the investigator's choice). Originally planned for 250 patients, the study was closed because of poor accrual with 81 evaluable patients, including 41 patients who received vinorelbine and 40 patients who received taxane. RESULTS: Response rates were 51% and 40% for the vinorelbine/trastuzumab arm and the taxane/trastuzumab arm, respectively (Fisher exact test; P = .37). The median time to disease progression was 8.5 months and 6.0 months for the vinorelbine- and taxane-based arms, respectively (log-rank test; P = .09). Treatment with either regimen generally was well tolerated, yielding comparable rates of neurologic and gastrointestinal toxicity. Vinorelbine-based treatment was associated with more anemia and neutropenia and with 2 episodes of cardiotoxicity. Taxane-based therapy was associated with more dermatologic toxicity, myalgias, and fluid retention. CONCLUSIONS: Both vinorelbine/trastuzumab and taxane/trastuzumab treatments were active as first-line therapy for HER2-positive, metastatic breast cancer and had comparable rates of efficacy and tolerability. The toxicities observed were the result of recognized side effects associated with each of the chemotherapy agents and schedules. These data can inform treatment decision making in this clinical setting.

A randomized, multicenter study to determine the safety and efficacy of the immunoconjugate SGN-15 plus docetaxel for the treatment of non-small cell lung carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Chemotherapy prolongs survival and improves quality of life (QOL) for good performance status (PS) patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Targeted therapies may improve chemotherapy effectiveness without worsening toxicity. SGN-15 is an antibody-drug conjugate (ADC), consisting of a chimeric murine monoclonal antibody recognizing the Lewis Y (Le(y)) antigen, conjugated to doxorubicin. Le(y) is an attractive target since it is expressed by most NSCLC. SGN-15 was active against Le(y)-positive tumors in early phase clinical trials and was synergistic with docetaxel in preclinical experiments. This Phase II, open-label study was conducted to confirm the activity of SGN-15 plus docetaxel in previously treated NSCLC patients. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Sixty-two patients with recurrent or metastatic NSCLC expressing Le(y), one or two prior chemotherapy regimens, and PS< or =2 were randomized 2:1 to receive SGN-15 200 mg/m2/week with docetaxel 35 mg/m2/week (Arm A) or docetaxel 35 mg/m2/week alone (Arm B) for 6 of 8 weeks. Intrapatient dose-escalation of SGN-15 to 350 mg/m2 was permitted in the second half of the study. Endpoints were survival, safety, efficacy, and quality of life. RESULTS: Forty patients on Arm A and 19 on Arm B received at least one treatment. Patients on Arms A and B had median survivals of 31.4 and 25.3 weeks, 12-month survivals of 29% and 24%, and 18-month survivals of 18% and 8%, respectively. Toxicity was mild in both arms. QOL analyses favored Arm A. CONCLUSIONS: SGN-15 plus docetaxel is a well-tolerated and active second and third line treatment for NSCLC patients. Ongoing studies are exploring alternate schedules to maximize synergy between these agents.