A phase II study to explore biomarkers for the use of mFOLFOX6/XELOX plus bevacizumab as a first-line chemotherapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (WJOG7612GTR).

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this prospective study was to assess the ability of plasma vascular endothelial growth factor-A short isoforms (pVEGF-Asi) to predict bevacizumab (BV) efficacy and to explore other circulating biomarkers in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients treated with modified FOLFOX6/XELOX plus BV (mFOLFOX6/XELOX + BV). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Pre-treatment plasma samples were collected from 100 mCRC patients receiving first-line chemotherapy with mFOLFOX6/XELOX + BV. The plasma levels of 11 angiogenesis-associated molecules, including pVEGF-Asi and 22 cancer-associated gene mutations in circulating tumor DNA, were analyzed. For the primary endpoint, we assumed that the hazard ratio (HR) for progression-free survival (PFS) calculated using a Cox proportional hazards model was <1.15, comparing patients with a high versus those with a low pVEGF-Asi level divided according to the median pVEGF-Asi value. RESULTS: The median value of pVEGF-Asi was 37 (range 6.5-262) pg/ml. The HR for PFS between the high and low pVEGF-Asi patient groups was 1.3 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.8-2.1; log rank, P = 0.25], which was larger than the predefined threshold of 1.15. The multivariate analysis demonstrated that PFS was significantly associated with plasma intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (pICAM-1) (≥190.0 versus <190.0 ng/ml; HR 2.1; 95% CI 1.3-3.5), RAS (mutant versus wild; HR 2.5; 95% CI 1.5-4.3), and FBXW7 (mutant versus wild; HR 2.8; 95% CI 1.2-6.8), whereas overall survival was significantly associated with pICAM-1 (HR 2.0; 95% CI 1.1-3.7) and RAS (HR 2.6; 95% CI 1.5-4.6). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of BV was unable to compensate for the poor PFS associated with a high pVEGF-Asi level, suggesting that pVEGF-Asi is unlikely to be a good predictive biomarker of the efficacy of mFOLFOX6/XELOX + BV therapy. The clinical significance of circulating ICAM-1, mutant RAS, and mutant FBXW7 levels should be studied further.

S-1 and oxaliplatin versus tegafur-uracil and leucovorin as post-operative adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with high-risk stage III colon cancer: updated 5-year survival of the phase III ACTS-CC 02 trial.

BACKGROUND: The ACTS-CC 02 trial demonstrated that S-1 plus oxaliplatin (SOX) was not superior to tegafur-uracil and leucovorin (UFT/LV) in terms of disease-free survival (DFS) as adjuvant chemotherapy for high-risk stage III colon cancer (any T, N2, or positive nodes around the origin of the feeding arteries). We now report the final overall survival (OS) and subgroup analysis according to the pathological stage (TNM 7th edition) for treatment efficacy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients who underwent curative resection for pathologically confirmed high-risk stage III colon cancer were randomly assigned to receive either UFT/LV (300 mg/m2 of UFT and 75 mg/day of LV on days 1-28, every 35 days, five cycles) or SOX (100 mg/m2 of oxaliplatin on day 1 and 80 mg/m2/day of S-1 on days 1-14, every 21 days, eight cycles). The primary endpoint was DFS and the patients' data were updated in February 2020. RESULTS: A total of 478 patients in the UFT/LV group and 477 patients in the SOX group were included in the final analysis. With a median follow-up time of 74.3 months, the 5-year DFS rate was 55.2% in the UFT/LV group and 58.1% in the SOX group [stratified hazard ratio (HR) 0.92; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76-1.11; P = 0.3973], and the 5-year OS rates were 78.3% and 79.1%, respectively (stratified HR 0.97; 95% CI 0.76-1.24; P = 0.8175). In the subgroup analysis, the 5-year OS rates in patients with T4N2b disease were 51.0% and 64.1% in the UFT/LV and SOX groups, respectively (HR 0.72; 95% CI 0.40-1.31). CONCLUSION: Our final analysis reconfirmed that SOX as adjuvant chemotherapy is not superior to UFT/LV in terms of DFS in patients with high-risk stage III colon cancer. The 5-year OS rate was similar in the UFT/LV and SOX groups.

Safety and efficacy of nivolumab in combination with S-1/capecitabine plus oxaliplatin in patients with previously untreated, unresectable, advanced, or recurrent gastric/gastroesophageal junction cancer: interim results of a randomized, phase II trial (ATTRACTION-4).

BACKGROUND: Nivolumab is approved as an option for third- or later-line treatment of advanced gastric/gastroesophageal junction (G/GEJ) cancer in several countries after ATTRACTION-2. To further improve the therapeutic efficacy of first-line therapy, exploration of a nivolumab-chemotherapy combination is warranted. In part 1 (phase II) of ATTRACTION-4, the safety and efficacy of nivolumab combined with S-1 plus oxaliplatin (SOX) or capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (CapeOX) as first-line therapy for unresectable advanced or recurrent human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative G/GEJ cancer were evaluated. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized (1 : 1) to receive nivolumab (360 mg intravenously every 3 weeks) plus SOX (S-1, 40 mg/m2 orally twice daily for 14 days followed by 7 days off; oxaliplatin, 130 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 every 3 weeks) or CapeOX (capecitabine, 1000 mg/m2 orally twice daily for 14 days followed by 7 days off; oxaliplatin, 130 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 every 3 weeks) until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or consent withdrawal. RESULTS: Of 40 randomized patients, 39 (nivolumab plus SOX, 21; nivolumab plus CapeOX, 18) and 38 (21 and 17, respectively) comprised the safety and efficacy populations, respectively. Most frequent (>10%) grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events were neutropenia (14.3%) in the nivolumab plus SOX group, and neutropenia (16.7%), anemia, peripheral sensory neuropathy, decreased appetite, type 1 diabetes mellitus, and nausea (11.1% each) in the nivolumab plus CapeOX group. No treatment-related death occurred. Objective response rate was 57.1% (95% confidence interval 34.0-78.2) with nivolumab plus SOX and 76.5% (50.1-93.2) with nivolumab plus CapeOX. Median overall survival was not reached (NR) in both groups. Median progression-free survival was 9.7 months (5.8-NR) and 10.6 months (5.6-12.5), respectively. CONCLUSION: Nivolumab combined with SOX/CapeOX was well tolerated and demonstrated encouraging efficacy for unresectable advanced or recurrent HER2-negative G/GEJ cancer. ATTRACTION-4 has proceeded to part 2 (phase III) to compare nivolumab plus SOX/CapeOX versus placebo plus SOX/CapeOX. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV ID: NCT02746796.

Phase III, randomised trial of avelumab versus physician's choice of chemotherapy as third-line treatment of patients with advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction cancer: primary analysis of JAVELIN Gastric 300.

Background: There currently are no internationally recognised treatment guidelines for patients with advanced gastric cancer/gastro-oesophageal junction cancer (GC/GEJC) in whom two prior lines of therapy have failed. The randomised, phase III JAVELIN Gastric 300 trial compared avelumab versus physician's choice of chemotherapy as third-line therapy in patients with advanced GC/GEJC. Patients and methods: Patients with unresectable, recurrent, locally advanced, or metastatic GC/GEJC were recruited at 147 sites globally. All patients were randomised to receive either avelumab 10 mg/kg by intravenous infusion every 2 weeks or physician's choice of chemotherapy (paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 or irinotecan 150 mg/m2 on days 1 and 15, each of a 4-week treatment cycle); patients ineligible for chemotherapy received best supportive care. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and safety. Results: A total of 371 patients were randomised. The trial did not meet its primary end point of improving OS {median, 4.6 versus 5.0 months; hazard ratio (HR)=1.1 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.9-1.4]; P = 0.81} or the secondary end points of PFS [median, 1.4 versus 2.7 months; HR=1.73 (95% CI 1.4-2.2); P > 0.99] or ORR (2.2% versus 4.3%) in the avelumab versus chemotherapy arms, respectively. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) of any grade occurred in 90 patients (48.9%) and 131 patients (74.0%) in the avelumab and chemotherapy arms, respectively. Grade ≥3 TRAEs occurred in 17 patients (9.2%) in the avelumab arm and in 56 patients (31.6%) in the chemotherapy arm. Conclusions: Treatment of patients with GC/GEJC with single-agent avelumab in the third-line setting did not result in an improvement in OS or PFS compared with chemotherapy. Avelumab showed a more manageable safety profile than chemotherapy. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02625623.

Randomized phase III and extension studies: efficacy and impacts on quality of life of naldemedine in subjects with opioid-induced constipation and cancer.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of naldemedine (a peripherally acting µ-opioid receptor antagonist) for opioid-induced constipation (OIC) in subjects with cancer was demonstrated in the primary report of a phase III, double-blind study (COMPOSE-4) and its open-label extension (COMPOSE-5). The primary end point, the proportion of spontaneous bowel movement (SBM) responders, was met. Here, we report results from secondary end points, including quality of life (QOL) assessments from these studies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In COMPOSE-4, eligible adults with OIC and cancer were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive once-daily oral naldemedine 0.2 mg (n = 97) or placebo (n = 96) for 2 weeks, and those who continued on to COMPOSE-5 received naldemedine for 12 weeks (n = 131). Secondary assessments in COMPOSE-4 included the proportion of complete SBM (CSBM) responders, SBM or CSBM responders by week, and subjects with ≥1 SBM or CSBM within 24 h postinitial dose. Changes from baseline in the frequency of SBMs or CSBMs per week were assessed at weeks 1 and 2. Time to the first SBM or CSBM postinitial dose was also evaluated. In both studies, QOL impact was evaluated by Patient Assessment of Constipation-Symptoms (PAC-SYM) and PAC-QOL questionnaires. RESULTS: Naldemedine improved bowel function for all secondary efficacy assessments versus placebo (all P ≤ 0.0002). The timely onset of naldemedine activity versus placebo was evidenced by median time to the first SBM (4.7 h versus 26.6 h) and CSBM (24.0 h versus 218.5 h) postinitial dose (all P < 0.0001). In COMPOSE-4, significant differences between groups were observed with the PAC-SYM stool domain (P = 0.045) and PAC-QOL dissatisfaction domain (P = 0.015). In COMPOSE-5, significant improvements from baseline were observed for overall and individual domain scores of PAC-SYM and PAC-QOL. CONCLUSIONS: Naldemedine provided effective and timely symptomatic relief from OIC and improved the QOL of subjects with OIC and cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION ID: www.ClinicalTrials.jp: JAPIC-CTI-132340 (COMPOSE-4) and JAPIC-CTI-132342 (COMPOSE-5).

Updated results from GEST study: a randomized, three-arm phase III study for advanced pancreatic cancer.

PURPOSE: The GEST study showed non-inferiority of S-1 but not superiority of gemcitabine plus S-1 (GS) to gemcitabine alone for overall survival with the data by the cut-off date of 31st July in 2010 for chemo-naïve patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. We considered it important to determine whether S-1 maintains non-inferiority after a long-term follow-up in the GEST study and to obtain a firm positive conclusion. In addition, it may be an interesting challenge to explore the efficacious profile of GS in the long-term follow-up study. Using the data from the follow-up period, background and efficacy in patients from Taiwan and Japan, as well as the rates of tumor shrinkage in locally advanced and metastatic patients (Waterfall plot) were also analyzed. METHODS: The results of the primary analysis were reconfirmed, and subset analysis of overall survival and progression-free survival was performed based on the overall survival data updated by the cut-off date of 31st July in 2011. RESULTS: The median follow-up period was 29.8 months, and 795 deaths occurred (95.6%). The median overall survival was 8.8 months for gemcitabine, 9.7 months for S-1 (hazard ratio [HR], 0.96; 97.5% confidence interval [CI], 0.79-1.17), and 9.9 months for GS (HR 0.91; 97.5% CI 0.75-1.11). In patients with performance status (PS) 0, the median overall survival was 9.8 months for gemcitabine, 10.9 months for S-1, and 10.5 months for GS. In patients with PS 1, the median overall survival was 6.2 months for gemcitabine, 6.3 months for S-1, and 9.6 months for GS. CONCLUSION: Our survey reconfirmed the non-inferiority of S-1 to gemcitabine and showed S-1 can be used as one of the standard treatment options for advanced pancreatic cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00498225.

Inter-institutional heterogeneity in outcomes of chemotherapy for metastatic gastric cancer: correlative study in the JCOG9912 phase III trial.

BACKGROUND: The standard chemotherapy regimen for gastric cancer has been established by several phase III trials. However, few studies have evaluated inter-institutional heterogeneity in randomised trials; such research may assure the generalisability of the results and also the reliability of the study group itself. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The Japan Clinical Oncology Group (JCOG)9912 phase III trial compared irinotecan plus cisplatin and S-1 alone with fluorouracil alone for metastatic gastric cancer, and finally demonstrated the non-inferiority of S-1 alone with respect to overall survival (OS). Mixed effects models were used to evaluate outcomes of 658 patients from 22 hospitals. After adjustment for nine background factors, the heterogeneity in OS, progression-free survival (PFS), and incidences of grade 3-4 adverse events among hospitals was estimated. We also estimated the correlation between outcomes and either hospital volume or medical oncology clinical experience. RESULTS: A large degree of heterogeneity in median OS was observed for fluorouracil alone (range, 8.3-13.3 months), while the difference in median PFS between hospitals was small (range, 2.4-3.4 months). Although some heterogeneity in the treatment effect of irinotecan plus cisplatin or S-1 alone was observed in OS and PFS, the HRs did not exceed 1.00 in any hospital for either regimen. There was minimal heterogeneity in the incidences of grade 3-4 adverse events. There was a trend towards correlation between greater medical oncology clinical experience and both better OS after fluorouracil alone and a lower HR for OS after irinotecan plus cisplatin, but it was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Large inter-institutional heterogeneity was observed in OS, but not in PFS, after the standard regimen, but there was little heterogeneity in the treatment effects of irinotecan plus cisplatin or S-1 alone, indicating that the final results of the JCOG9912 trial can be generalised to the target population. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00142350.

Randomized phase III study of bevacizumab plus FOLFIRI and bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX6 as first-line treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (WJOG4407G).

BACKGROUND: FOLFIRI and FOLFOX have shown equivalent efficacy for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), but their comparative effectiveness is unknown when combined with bevacizumab. PATIENTS AND METHODS: WJOG4407G was a randomized, open-label, phase III trial conducted in Japan. Patients with previously untreated mCRC were randomized 1:1 to receive either FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab (FOLFIRI + Bev) or mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab (mFOLFOX6 + Bev), stratified by institution, adjuvant chemotherapy, and liver-limited disease. The primary end point was non-inferiority of FOLFIRI + Bev to mFOLFOX6 + Bev in progression-free survival (PFS), with an expected hazard ratio (HR) of 0.9 and non-inferiority margin of 1.25 (power 0.85, one-sided α-error 0.025). The secondary end points were response rate (RR), overall survival (OS), safety, and quality of life (QoL) during 18 months. This trial is registered to the University Hospital Medical Information Network, number UMIN000001396. RESULTS: Among 402 patients enrolled from September 2008 to January 2012, 395 patients were eligible for efficacy analysis. The median PFS for FOLFIRI + Bev (n = 197) and mFOLFOX6 + Bev (n = 198) were 12.1 and 10.7 months, respectively [HR, 0.905; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.723-1.133; P = 0.003 for non-inferiority]. The median OS for FOLFIRI + Bev and mFOLFOX6 + Bev were 31.4 and 30.1 months, respectively (HR, 0.990; 95% CI 0.785-1.249). The best overall RRs were 64% for FOLFIRI + Bev and 62% for mFOLFOX6 + Bev. The common grade 3 or higher adverse events were leukopenia (11% in FOLFIRI + Bev/5% in mFOLFOX6 + Bev), neutropenia (46%/35%), diarrhea (9%/5%), febrile neutropenia (5%/2%), peripheral neuropathy (0%/22%), and venous thromboembolism (6%/2%). The QoL assessed by FACT-C (TOI-PFC) and FACT/GOG-Ntx was favorable for FOLFIRI + Bev during 18 months. CONCLUSION: FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab was non-inferior for PFS, compared with mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab, as the first-line systemic treatment for mCRC. CLINICAL TRIALS NUMBER: UMIN000001396.

A randomized phase II study of S-1 plus oral leucovorin versus S-1 monotherapy in patients with gemcitabine-refractory advanced pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated the efficacy and toxicity of adding oral leucovorin (LV) to S-1 when compared with S-1 monotherapy in patients with gemcitabine-refractory pancreatic cancer (PC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Gemcitabine-refractory PC patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive S-1 at 40, 50, or 60 mg according to body surface area plus LV 25 mg, both given orally twice daily for 1 week, repeated every 2 weeks (SL group), or S-1 monotherapy at the same dose as the SL group for 4 weeks, repeated every 6 weeks (S-1 group). The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: Among 142 patients enrolled, 140 were eligible for efficacy assessment (SL: n = 69 and S-1: n = 71). PFS was significantly longer in the SL group than in the S-1 group [median PFS, 3.8 versus 2.7 months; hazard ratio (HR), 0.56; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.37-0.85; P = 0.003]). The disease control rate was significantly higher in the SL group than in the S-1 group (91% versus 72%; P = 0.004). Overall survival (OS) was similar in both groups (median OS, 6.3 versus 6.1 months; HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.54-1.22; P = 0.463). After adjusting for patient background factors in a multivariate analysis, OS tended to be better in the SL group (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.47-1.07; P = 0.099). Both treatments were well tolerated, although gastrointestinal toxicities were slightly more severe in the SL group. CONCLUSION: The addition of LV to S-1 significantly improved PFS in patients with gemcitabine-refractory advanced PC, and a phase III trial has been initiated in a similar setting. CLINICAL TRIALS NUMBER: Japan Pharmaceutical Information Center: JapicCTI-111554.

Comparison of two different S-1 plus cisplatin dosing schedules as first-line chemotherapy for metastatic and/or recurrent gastric cancer: a multicenter, randomized phase III trial (SOS).

BACKGROUND: Five-weekly S-1 plus cisplatin (SP5) is one of the standard first-line regimens for advanced gastric cancer (GC), proven in a Japanese phase III study. To enhance the dose intensity of cisplatin, 3-weekly S-1 plus cisplatin (SP3) was developed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase III study evaluated whether SP3 (S-1 80 mg/m(2)/day on days 1-14 and cisplatin 60 mg/m(2) on day 1) was noninferior/superior to SP5 (S-1 80-120 mg/day on days 1-21 and cisplatin 60 mg/m(2) on day 1 or 8) in terms of progression-free survival (PFS). Chemotherapy-naive patients with metastatic, recurrent gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma were randomized 1 : 1 to receive either SP3 or SP5. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00915382). RESULTS: Between February 2009 and January 2012, 625 patients were randomized at 42 sites in Korea and Japan. With a median follow-up duration of 32.4 months (range, 13.3-48.6 months) in surviving patients, SP3 was not only noninferior but also superior to SP5 in terms of PFS [median 5.5 versus 4.9 months; hazard ratio (HR) = 0.82; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.68-0.99; P = 0.0418 for superiority). There was no difference in overall survival (OS) between the groups (median 14.1 versus 13.9 months; HR = 0.99; 95% CI 0.81-1.21; P = 0.9068). In patients with measurable disease, the response rates were 60% in the SP3 arm and 50% in the SP5 arm (P = 0.065). Both regimens were generally well tolerated, but grade 3 or higher anemia (19% versus 9%) and neutropenia (39% versus 9%) were more frequent in SP3. CONCLUSIONS: SP3 is superior to SP5 in terms of PFS. However, since the improvement in PFS was only slight and there was no difference in OS, both SP3 and SP5 can be recommended as first-line treatments for patients with advanced GC.

S-1 as adjuvant chemotherapy for stage III colon cancer: a randomized phase III study (ACTS-CC trial).

BACKGROUND: S-1 is an oral fluoropyrimidine whose antitumor effects have been demonstrated in treating various gastrointestinal cancers, including metastatic colon cancer, when administered as monotherapy or in combination chemotherapy. We conducted a randomized phase III study investigating the efficacy of S-1 as adjuvant chemotherapy for colon cancer by evaluating its noninferiority to tegafur-uracil plus leucovorin (UFT/LV). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients aged 20-80 years with curatively resected stage III colon cancer were randomly assigned to receive S-1 (80-120 mg/day on days 1-28 every 42 days; four courses) or UFT/LV (UFT: 300-600 mg/day and LV: 75 mg/day on days 1-28 every 35 days; five courses). The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS) at 3 years. RESULTS: A total of 1518 patients (758 and 760 in the S-1 and UFT/LV group, respectively) were included in the full analysis set. The 3-year DFS rate was 75.5% and 72.5% in the S-1 and UFT/LV group, respectively. The stratified hazard ratio for DFS in the S-1 group compared with the UFT/LV group was 0.85 (95% confidence interval: 0.70-1.03), demonstrating the noninferiority of S-1 (noninferiority stratified log-rank test, P < 0.001). In the subgroup analysis, no significant interactions were identified between the major baseline characteristics and the treatment groups. CONCLUSION: Adjuvant chemotherapy using S-1 for stage III colon cancer was confirmed to be noninferior in DFS compared with UFT/LV. S-1 could be a new treatment option as adjuvant chemotherapy for colon cancer. CLINICALTRIALSGOV: NCT00660894.

Impact of excision repair cross-complementing gene 1 (ERCC1) on the outcomes of patients with advanced gastric cancer: correlative study in Japan Clinical Oncology Group Trial JCOG9912.

BACKGROUND: Since the best chemotherapy regimen for each patient with advanced gastric cancer is uncertain, we aimed to identify molecular prognostic or predictive biomarkers from biopsy specimens in JCOG9912, a randomized phase III trial for advanced gastric cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Endoscopic biopsy specimens from primary lesions were collected in 445 of 704 randomized patients in JCOG9912. We measured the mRNA expression of excision repair cross-complementing group 1 (ERCC1), thymidylate synthase, dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase, and five other genes, then, categorized them into low and high groups relative to the median, and examined whether gene expression was associated with efficacy end point. RESULTS: Multivariate analyses showed that high ERCC1 expression [HR 1.37; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08-1.75; P = 0.010], performance status ≥ 1 (HR 1.45; 95% CI 1.13-1.86; P = 0.004), and number of metastatic sites ≥ 2 (HR 1.66; 95% CI 1.28-1.86; P < 0.001) were associated with a poor prognosis, and recurrent disease (versus unresectable; HR 0.75; 95% CI 0.56-1.00; P = 0.049) was associated with a favorable prognosis. None of these molecular factors were a predictive marker for choosing irinotecan plus cisplatin or 5-fluorouracil rather than S-1. CONCLUSION: These correlative analyses suggest that ERCC1 is an independent prognostic factor for overall survival in the first-line treatment of gastric cancer. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: C000000062, www.umin.ac.jp.

The effect of CYP2C19 polymorphism on the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of tivantinib (ARQ 197): results from a phase I trial in advanced solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: Tivantinib (formerly ARQ 197) is a selective inhibitor of c-Met mainly metabolized by CYP2C19. CYP2C19 is known for genetic polymorphisms, and ~20% of Asians are poor metabolizers (PMs), while others are extensive metabolizers (EMs). In this study, we examined the safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), and preliminary efficacy of tivantinib as a single agent to determine recommended phase II doses (RPIIDs). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty-seven patients (EMs, 33; PMs, 14) with solid tumors were orally treated with tivantinib, from 70 to 360 mg bid in a 3 + 3 dose-escalation scheme. EMs and PMs were separately enrolled at the doses >120 mg bid. RESULTS: Tivantinib was well tolerated up to 360 mg bid for EMs and 240 mg bid for PMs. Neutropenia, leukopenia, anemia, fatigue, and anorexia were the frequent adverse events related to tivantinib and were commonly observed in both EMs and PMs. PMs had 1.9-fold higher AUC(0-12) compared with EMs at 240 mg bid. Regardless of CYP2C19 phenotype, Gr.4 neutropenia occurred in patients with relatively high exposure to tivantinib. A confirmed partial response was achieved in two non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. CONCLUSION: Two different settings of RPIIDs, 360 mg bid for EMs and 240 mg bid for PMs, were determined.

Phase I study of TAS-102 treatment in Japanese patients with advanced solid tumours.

BACKGROUND: TAS-102 consists of α, α, α-trifluorothymidine (TFT) and an inhibitor of thymidine phosphorylase (TPI). We conducted a dose-escalation phase I study in Japanese patients with advanced solid tumours. METHODS: TAS-102 was administered twice daily on days 1-5 and days 8-12 in a 28-day cycle to patients with solid tumours refractory to standard chemotherapy, to determine its maximum tolerated dose (MTD), dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), and pharmacokinetics (PKs). MTD was evaluated in cycle 1. RESULTS: Safety and PKs were evaluated in 21 patients treated with TAS-102 at 30, 40, 50, 60, or 70 mg m(-2) per day. DLTs, such as grade 4 leucopenia, grade 4 neutropenia, and grade 4 thrombocytopenia, were observed in two patients at doses of 30 and 70 mg m(-2). α, α, α-trifluorothymidine and TPI exposures increased dose dependently, and the percentage of decrease in neutrophil count and TFT exposure were significantly correlated. The disease control rate was 50.0% with a median progression-free survival of 2.4 months in 18 colorectal cancer patients. The dose of TAS-102 was not increased above 70 mg m(-2) per day because of the increased tendency for grade 3 and 4 neutropenia, and 70 mg m(-2) per day was the recommended dose for phase II studies. CONCLUSIONS: TAS-102 at 70 mg m(-2) per day was tolerated in Japanese patients with advanced solid tumours. Phase II studies are ongoing in patients with colorectal cancer.

Safety of UFT/LV and S-1 as adjuvant therapy for stage III colon cancer in phase III trial: ACTS-CC trial.

BACKGROUND: The Adjuvant Chemotherapy Trial of TS-1 for Colon Cancer (ACTS-CC) is a phase III trial designed to validate the non-inferiority of S-1 to UFT/leucovorin (LV) as postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy for stage III colon cancer. We report the results of a planned safety analysis. METHODS: Patients aged 20-80 years with curatively resected stage III colon cancer were randomly assigned to receive UFT/LV (UFT, 300 mg m(-2) per day as tegafur; LV, 75 mg per day on days 1-28, every 35 days, 5 courses) or S-1 (80, 100, or 120 mg per day on days 1-28, every 42 days, 4 courses). Treatment status and safety were evaluated. RESULTS: Of 1535 enrolled patients, a total of 1504 (756 allocated to S-1 and 748 to UFT/LV) were analysed. The completion rate of protocol treatment was 77% in the S-1 group and 73% in the UFT/LV group. The overall incidence of adverse events (AEs) were 80% in S-1 and 74% in UFT/LV. Stomatitis, anorexia, hyperpigmentation, and haematological toxicities were common in S-1, whereas increased alanine aminotransferase and aspartate aminotransferase were common in UFT/LV. The incidences of grade 3 AEs were 16% and 14%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Although AE profiles differed between the groups, feasibility of the protocol treatment was good. Both S-1 and UFT/LV could be safely used as adjuvant chemotherapy.

Phase 1 study of conatumumab, a pro-apoptotic death receptor 5 agonist antibody, in Japanese patients with advanced solid tumors.

PURPOSE: Conatumumab is a fully human monoclonal agonist antibody against human death receptor 5 (DR5). The primary objectives of this phase 1 study were to assess the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics (PK) of conatumumab in Japanese patients with advanced solid tumors. METHODS: This is an open-label ascending dose study with a starting dose level of 3 mg/kg. Subsequent doses of 10 and 20 mg/kg were planned. Six patients were enrolled into 1 of 3 dose cohorts (3, 10, or 20 mg/kg) of conatumumab administered intravenously once every 2 weeks as a single agent. No conatumumab was administered on day 43 to allow the assessment of terminal PK parameters. The primary endpoints were the incidence of dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) and assessment of PK parameters of conatumumab. RESULTS: Eighteen patients received at least 1 dose of conatumumab. There were no DLTs observed as defined in the protocol. No patients had an adverse event leading to conatumumab discontinuation. Conatumumab demonstrated dose-linear kinetics. A best response of stable disease was reported in nine patients. Monocytes were found to express DR5 and showed a high degree of conatumumab receptor occupancy after treatment at all dose levels. CONCLUSIONS: Conatumumab administered up to 20 mg/kg once every 2 weeks was well tolerated in Japanese patients with advanced solid tumors. Adverse events and PK in these patients were similar to those in the first in human (FIH) study.

Phase II study of S-1 plus leucovorin in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: S-1, a novel oral fluoropyrimidine, is well tolerated in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The response rate of S-1 for colorectal cancer is high, ranging from 35% to 40%. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of S-1 combined with oral leucovorin (LV) to enhance antitumor activity in chemotherapy-naive patients with mCRC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: S-1 was given orally twice daily for two consecutive weeks at a daily dose of 80-120 mg, followed by a 2-week rest period, within a 4-week cycle. LV was given orally twice a day at a daily dose of 50 mg, simultaneously with S-1. RESULTS: Of the 56 patients with previously untreated mCRC, 32 (57%) had partial responses. The median follow-up period was 27.2 months. The median time to progression was 6.7 months (95% confidence interval 5.4-7.9). The median survival time was 24.3 months. There was no treatment-related death or grade 4 toxicity. The most common grade 3 toxic effects were diarrhea (32%), anorexia (21%), stomatitis (20%), and neutropenia (14%). CONCLUSION: S-1 combined with LV therapy demonstrated promising efficacy and acceptable safety in chemotherapy-naive patients with mCRC without the concurrent use of irinotecan, oxaliplatin, or molecular-targeted drugs.

Phase II study of oxaliplatin plus S-1 as first-line treatment for advanced gastric cancer (G-SOX study).

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of oxaliplatin combined with S-1 (SOX regimen) for unresectable advanced or recurrent gastric cancer were investigated. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Oxaliplatin was administered i.v. (100 mg/m(2)) on day 1, while S-1 was administered orally (80 mg/m(2)/day, b.i.d.) for 14 days followed by a 7-day rest. This schedule was repeated every 3 weeks. RESULTS: Among 55 patients enrolled, one patient received oxaliplatin for the other study, and three patients were considered unsuitable against the inclusion criteria. Accordingly, 51 patients were assessable for efficacy. The response rate was 59%, and the disease control rate was 84%. The median progression-free survival time was 6.5 months, the 1-year survival rate was 71%, and the median survival time was 16.5 months. In 54 patients assessed for safety, the major grade 3/4 toxic effects were neutropenia (22%), thrombocytopenia (13%), anemia (9%), anorexia (6%), fatigue (6%), and sensory neuropathy (4%). CONCLUSION: These findings indicate that SOX regimen with oxaliplatin at a dose of 100 mg/m(2) is feasible and shows promising efficacy against advanced gastric cancer.

Impact of hemoglobin level on survival in definitive chemoradiotherapy for T4/M1 lymph node esophageal cancer.

We retrospectively investigated the impact of the pre-chemoradiotherapy hemoglobin level (pre-CRT Hb level) for T4 and/or M1 lymph node (LYM) squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus. Chemotherapy consisted of protracted infusion with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) at 400 mg/m(2)/day on days 1-5 and 8-12, combined with cisplatin at 40 mg/m(2)/day on days 1 and 8, repeated twice at a 5-week interval. Concurrent radiation therapy was started on day 1 and delivered at 2 Gy/day for five days a week for a total radiation dose of 60 Gy, with a two-week break after a cumulative dose of 30 Gy. Several factors considered to be related with treatment outcome were evaluated by univariate and multivariate analysis. A total of 48 patients with T4/M1 LYM (lymphocyte) esophageal cancer treated with chemoradiotherapy (CRT) between September 2002 and April 2005 were enrolled. The complete response rate to this regimen was 44% and median survival time was 13.6 months, with a median follow-up period of 26.8 months. Median pre-CRT Hb level was 13.5 (10.4-15.3) g/dL. The CR rate in patients with a pre-CRT Hb level of 13 g/dL or less was only 24% but it was 60% in those with a level that was more than 13 g/dL (P=0.01). As for survival, anovarevealed that a pre-CRT Hb of 13 g/dL or less was a significant prognostic factor with a hazard ratio of 0.45 (95% confidence interval [CI]); 0.21-0.97, P=0.04), while on manova, including performance status, tumor size, TNM stage and pre-CRT Hb level, a pre-CRT Hb level of 13 g/dL or less was the only significant prognostic factor, with a hazard ratio of 0.35 (95% CI; 0.13-0.90, P=0.03). In conclusion, the pre-CRT Hb level may be an important determinant of outcome in patients with T4/M1 LYM squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus.