Nivolumab in sorafenib-naive and sorafenib-experienced patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: 5-year follow-up from CheckMate 040.

BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC) have a poor prognosis and high mortality. Nivolumab monotherapy demonstrated clinical benefit with an acceptable safety profile in patients with aHCC in the CheckMate 040 study. Five-year follow-up of the sorafenib-naive and sorafenib-experienced groups of CheckMate 040 is presented here. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients received nivolumab monotherapy at dose levels of 0.1-10.0 mg/kg (dose-escalation phase) or 3 mg/kg (dose-expansion phase) every 2 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary endpoints were safety and tolerability (dose escalation), and objective response rate (ORR) by blinded independent central review (BICR) and by investigator as per RECIST version 1.1 (dose expansion). RESULTS: Eighty sorafenib-naive and 154 sorafenib-experienced patients were treated. Minimum follow-up in both groups was 60 months. ORR as per BICR was 20% [95% confidence interval (CI) 12% to 30%] and 14% (95% CI 9% to 21%) in the sorafenib-naive and sorafenib-experienced groups, respectively. Responses occurred regardless of HCC etiology or baseline tumor cell programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression levels. Median overall survival (OS) was 26.6 months (95% CI 16.6-30.6 months) and 15.1 months (95% CI 13.0-18.2 months) in sorafenib-naive and sorafenib-experienced patients, respectively. The 3-year OS rates were 28% in the sorafenib-naive and 20% in the sorafenib-experienced groups; 5-year OS rates were 14% and 12%, respectively. No new safety signals were identified; grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events were observed in 33% and 21% of patients in the sorafenib-naive and sorafenib-experienced groups, respectively. Biomarker analyses showed that baseline PD-L1 expression ≥1% was associated with higher ORR and longer OS compared with PD-L1 <1%. In the sorafenib-naive group, patients with OS ≥3 years exhibited higher baseline CD8 T-cell density compared with those with OS <1 year. CONCLUSION: With 5 years of follow-up, nivolumab monotherapy continued to provide durable clinical benefit with manageable safety in sorafenib-naive and sorafenib-experienced patients with aHCC.

Nivolumab plus ipilimumab combination therapy in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma previously treated with sorafenib: 5-year results from CheckMate 040.

BACKGROUND: Nivolumab plus ipilimumab demonstrated promising clinical activity and durable responses in sorafenib-treated patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in the CheckMate 040 study at 30.7-month median follow-up. Here, we present 5-year results from this cohort. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized 1 : 1 : 1 to arm A [nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg Q3W (four doses)] or arm B [nivolumab 3 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg Q3W (four doses)], each followed by nivolumab 240 mg Q2W, or arm C (nivolumab 3 mg/kg Q2W plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg Q6W). The primary objectives were safety, tolerability, investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR), and duration of response (DOR) per RECIST version 1.1. RESULTS: A total of 148 patients were randomized across treatment arms. At 60-month minimum follow-up (62.6-month median follow-up), the ORR was 34% (n = 17), 27% (n = 13), and 29% (n = 14) in arms A, B, and C, respectively. The median DOR was 51.2 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 12.6 months-not estimable (NE)], 15.2 months (95% CI 7.1 months-NE), and 21.7 months (95% CI 4.2 months-NE), respectively. The median overall survival (OS) was 22.2 months (34/50; 95% CI 9.4-54.8 months) in arm A, 12.5 months (38/49; 95% CI 7.6-16.4 months) in arm B, and 12.7 months (40/49; 95% CI 7.4-30.5 months) in arm C; 60-month OS rates were 29%, 19%, and 21%, respectively. In an exploratory analysis of OS by response (6-month landmark), the median OS was meaningfully longer for responders versus nonresponders for all arms. No new safety signals were identified with longer follow-up. There were no new discontinuations due to immune-mediated adverse events since the primary analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with the primary analysis, the arm A regimen of nivolumab plus ipilimumab continued to demonstrate clinically meaningful responses and long-term survival benefit, with no new safety signals in patients with advanced HCC following sorafenib treatment, further supporting its use as a second-line treatment in these patients.

Four-year overall survival update from the phase III HIMALAYA study of tremelimumab plus durvalumab in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: In the phase III HIMALAYA study (NCT03298451) in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC), STRIDE (Single Tremelimumab Regular Interval Durvalumab) significantly improved overall survival (OS) versus sorafenib; durvalumab monotherapy was noninferior to sorafenib for OS. Results reported herein are from a 4-year updated OS analysis of HIMALAYA. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Participants with uHCC and no previous systemic treatment were randomized to STRIDE (n = 393), durvalumab (n = 389), or sorafenib (n = 389). The updated data cut-off was 23 January 2023. OS and serious adverse events (AEs) were assessed. Additionally, baseline characteristics and subsequent therapies were analyzed in long-term survivors (≥36 months beyond randomization). RESULTS: For STRIDE, durvalumab, and sorafenib, median [95% confidence interval (CI)] follow-up was 49.12 months (46.95-50.17 months), 48.46 months (46.82-49.81 months), and 47.31 months (45.08-49.15 months), respectively. OS hazard ratio (95% CI) for STRIDE versus sorafenib was 0.78 (0.67-0.92). The 36-month OS rate for STRIDE was 30.7% versus 19.8% for sorafenib. The 48-month OS rate remained higher for STRIDE at 25.2%, versus 15.1% for sorafenib. The long-term OS benefit of STRIDE was observed across clinically relevant subgroups and was further improved in participants who achieved disease control. Long-term survivors with STRIDE (n = 103) included participants across clinically relevant subgroups, and 57.3% (59/103) had no reported subsequent anticancer therapy. No new serious treatment-related AEs occurred with STRIDE from the primary analysis (17.5%; 68/388). Durvalumab maintained OS noninferiority to sorafenib and no late-onset safety signals were identified. CONCLUSIONS: These data represent the longest follow-up to date in phase III studies in uHCC. The unprecedented 3- and 4-year OS rates reinforce the sustained long-term OS benefit of STRIDE versus sorafenib. STRIDE maintained a tolerable yet differentiated safety profile from other current uHCC therapies. Results continue to support the long-term benefits of STRIDE in a diverse population, reflective of uHCC globally.

Circulating tumor DNA analysis of the phase III VOYAGER trial: KIT mutational landscape and outcomes in patients with advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumor treated with avapritinib or regorafenib.

BACKGROUND: The current treatment paradigm of imatinib-resistant metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) does not incorporate KIT/PDGFRA genotypes in therapeutic drug sequencing, except for PDGFRA exon 18-mutant GIST that is indicated for avapritinib treatment. Here, circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) sequencing was used to analyze plasma samples prospectively collected in the phase III VOYAGER trial to understand how the KIT/PDGFRA mutational landscape contributes to tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) resistance and to determine its clinical validity and utility. PATIENTS AND METHODS: VOYAGER (N = 476) compared avapritinib with regorafenib in patients with KIT/PDGFRA-mutant GIST previously treated with imatinib and one or two additional TKIs (NCT03465722). KIT/PDGFRA ctDNA mutation profiling of plasma samples at baseline and end of treatment was assessed with 74-gene Guardant360® CDx. Molecular subgroups were determined and correlated with outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 386/476 patients with KIT/PDGFRA-mutant tumors underwent baseline (pre-trial treatment) ctDNA analysis; 196 received avapritinib and 190 received regorafenib. KIT and PDGFRA mutations were detected in 75.1% and 5.4%, respectively. KIT resistance mutations were found in the activation loop (A-loop; 80.4%) and ATP-binding pocket (ATP-BP; 40.8%); 23.4% had both. An average of 2.6 KIT mutations were detected per patient; 17.2% showed 4-14 different KIT resistance mutations. Of all pathogenic KIT variants, 28.0% were novel, including alterations in exons/codons previously unreported. PDGFRA mutations showed similar patterns. ctDNA-detected KIT ATP-BP mutations negatively prognosticated avapritinib activity, with a median progression-free survival (mPFS) of 1.9 versus 5.6 months for regorafenib. mPFS for regorafenib did not vary regardless of the presence or absence of ATP-BP/A-loop mutants and was greater than mPFS with avapritinib in this population. Secondary KIT ATP-BP pocket mutation variants, particularly V654A, were enriched upon disease progression with avapritinib. CONCLUSIONS: ctDNA sequencing efficiently detects KIT/PDGFRA mutations and prognosticates outcomes in patients with TKI-resistant GIST treated with avapritinib. ctDNA analysis can be used to monitor disease progression and provide more personalized treatment.

[Application value of DNA damage repair variants in adjuvant therapy of triple negative breast cancer].

Objective: To investigate the correlation between adjuvant chemotherapy with platinum-containing regimens and DNA damage repair (DDR) defects in early-stage triple negative breast cancer (TNBC), and to provide a basis for precise treatment of TNBC. Methods: Next-generation sequencing (NGS) testing was performed on postoperative breast cancer specimens selected from the Cancer Hospital of Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences from June 2009 to October 2015 to analyze the correlation between DDR gene variants and the efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy with TNBC platinum-containing regimens, and thus to screen the superior population for adjuvant chemotherapy with TNBC platinum-containing regimens. The study used t-test, χ(2) test, Fisher's exact test, rank sum test and multifactorial logistic analysis to assess the associations between mutated genes and clinicopathological characteristics and prognosis, and Log-rank test and Cox proportional risk model were used for survival and correlation analysis. Results: NGS results were successfully obtained in 149 patients (74 in the platinum-containing group and 75 in the platinum-free group), with a 97.3% (145/149) DDR gene mutation rate and a median number of 4 mutations in all patients. 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) was 85.4% and 75.0% for patients with DDR gene mutations and DDR gene wild-type, respectively, without statistical difference (P=0.825). The 5-year DFS rates of patients with homologous recombination repair (HRR) pathway mutation were 84.6% in platinum-containing (TCb) group and 84.9% in platinum-free (EC-T) group (P=0.554), respectively. The 5-year DFS rates of patients with and without mutations in the platinite-containing HRR pathway were 84.9% and 85.0%, respectively (P=0.751). The number of DDR pathways with mutations and the number of DDR gene mutations were not associated with prognosis (both P>0.05). PIK3CA mutation patients in TCb group had a worse prognosis than wild-type patients (5-year DFS were 71.4% and 88.1%, P=0.037), and KMT2D mutation patients in EC-T group had a worse prognosis than wild-type patients (5-year DFS were 76.9% and 86.8%, P=0.039). Conclusions: DDR gene variation is common in TNBC, more clinical studies are needed to prove whether DDR variation can serve as effective biomarkers for treatment with platinum.

Safety, pharmacokinetics, and antitumor activity of the anti-CEACAM5-DM4 antibody-drug conjugate tusamitamab ravtansine (SAR408701) in patients with advanced solid tumors: first-in-human dose-escalation study.

BACKGROUND: Tusamitamab ravtansine (SAR408701) is an antibody-drug conjugate composed of a humanized monoclonal antibody that binds carcinoembryonic antigen-related cell adhesion molecule-5 (CEACAM5) and a cytotoxic maytansinoid that selectively targets CEACAM5-expressing tumor cells. In this phase I dose-escalation study, we evaluated the safety, pharmacokinetics, and preliminary antitumor activity of tusamitamab ravtansine in patients with solid tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients were aged ≥18 years, had locally advanced/metastatic solid tumors that expressed or were likely to express CEACAM5, and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status of 0 or 1. Patients were treated with ascending doses of tusamitamab ravtansine intravenously every 2 weeks (Q2W). The first three dose levels (5, 10, and 20 mg/m2) were evaluated using an accelerated escalation protocol, after which an adaptive Bayesian procedure was used. The primary endpoint was the incidence of dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) during the first two cycles, graded using National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (NCI CTCAE) v4.03 criteria. RESULTS: Thirty-one patients received tusamitamab ravtansine (range 5-150 mg/m2). The DLT population comprised 28 patients; DLTs (reversible grade 3 microcystic keratopathy) occurred in three of eight patients treated with tusamitamab ravtansine 120 mg/m2 and in two of three patients treated with 150 mg/m2. The maximum tolerated dose was identified as 100 mg/m2. Twenty-two patients (71%) experienced ≥1 treatment-related treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE), seven patients (22.6%) experienced ≥1 treatment-related grade ≥3 TEAE, and three patients (9.7%) discontinued treatment due to TEAEs. The most common TEAEs were asthenia, decreased appetite, keratopathy, and nausea. Three patients had confirmed partial responses. The mean plasma exposure of tusamitamab ravtansine increased in a dose-proportional manner from 10 to 150 mg/m2. CONCLUSIONS: Tusamitamab ravtansine had a favorable safety profile with reversible, dose-related keratopathy as the DLT. Based on the overall safety profile, pharmacokinetic data, and Bayesian model recommendations, the maximum tolerated dose of tusamitamab ravtansine was defined as 100 mg/m2 Q2W.

[The prospects of DNA damage repair variants guiding platinum compounds in the treatment of triple negative breast cancer].

Triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) is prone to recurrence and metastasis, which is the subtype of poorest prognosis. Chemotherapy is the main treatment, although there is lack of effective adjuvant chemotherapy regimens. The unsatisfactory efficacy of chemotherapy has been a bottleneck in improving the outcome of TNBC. Platinum compounds act directly on DNA to kill tumor cells, and they have a stronger killing effect on tumor cells carrying DNA damage repair (DDR) defects, which is an important entry point to improve the efficacy of TNBC. Biomarkers for predicting the efficacy of platinum drugs in TNBC treatment have always been a hot topic. The DDR pathway contains a large number of related genes, and recent studies have shown that deficiencies in the DDR pathway may be associated with the efficacy of platinum drugs, which is expected to be a biomarker for predicting the efficacy of platinum drugs in breast cancer treatment.

Diagnosis and management of tropomyosin receptor kinase (TRK) fusion sarcomas: expert recommendations from the World Sarcoma Network.

Sarcomas are a heterogeneous group of malignancies with mesenchymal lineage differentiation. The discovery of neurotrophic tyrosine receptor kinase (NTRK) gene fusions as tissue-agnostic oncogenic drivers has led to new personalized therapies for a subset of patients with sarcoma in the form of tropomyosin receptor kinase (TRK) inhibitors. NTRK gene rearrangements and fusion transcripts can be detected with different molecular pathology techniques, while TRK protein expression can be demonstrated with immunohistochemistry. The rarity and diagnostic complexity of NTRK gene fusions raise a number of questions and challenges for clinicians. To address these challenges, the World Sarcoma Network convened two meetings of expert adult oncologists and pathologists and subsequently developed this article to provide practical guidance on the management of patients with sarcoma harboring NTRK gene fusions. We propose a diagnostic strategy that considers disease stage and histologic and molecular subtypes to facilitate routine testing for TRK expression and subsequent testing for NTRK gene fusions.

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.

Efficacy and safety findings from DREAM: a phase III study of DHP107 (oral paclitaxel) versus i.v. paclitaxel in patients with advanced gastric cancer after failure of first-line chemotherapy.

Background: Paclitaxel is currently only available as an intravenous (i.v.) formulation. DHP107 is a novel oral formulation of lipid ingredients and paclitaxel. DHP107 demonstrated comparable efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics to i.v. paclitaxel as a second-line therapy in patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC). DREAM is a multicenter, open-label, prospective, randomized phase III study of patients with histologically/cytologically confirmed, unresectable/recurrent AGC after first-line therapy failure. Methods and materials: Patients were randomized 1 : 1 to DHP107 (200 mg/m2 orally twice daily days 1, 8, 15 every 4 weeks) or i.v. paclitaxel (175 mg/m2 day 1 every 3 weeks). Patients were stratified by Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, disease status, and prior treatment; response was assessed (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors) every 6 weeks. Primary end point: non-inferiority of progression-free survival (PFS); secondary end points: overall response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), and safety. For the efficacy analysis, sequential tests for non-inferiority were carried out, first with a non-inferiority margin of 1.48, then with a margin of 1.25. Results: Baseline characteristics were balanced in the 236 randomized patients (n = 118 per arm). Median PFS (per-protocol) was 3.0 (95% CI 1.7-4.0) months for DHP107 and 2.6 (95% CI 1.8-2.8) months for paclitaxel (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.85; 95% CI 0.64-1.13). A sensitivity analysis on PFS using independent central review showed similar results (HR = 0.93; 95% CI 0.70-1.24). Median OS (full analysis set) was 9.7 (95% CI 7.1 - 11.5) months for DHP107 versus 8.9 (95% CI 7.1-12.2) months for paclitaxel (HR = 1.04; 95% CI 0.76-1.41). ORR was 17.8% for DHP107 (CR 4.2%; PR 13.6%) versus 25.4% for paclitaxel (CR 3.4%; PR 22.0%). Nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and mucositis were more common with DHP107; peripheral neuropathy was more common with paclitaxel. There were only few Grade≥3 adverse events, most commonly neutropenia (42% versus 53%); febrile neutropenia was reported infrequently (5.9% versus 2.5%). No hypersensitivity reactions occurred with DHP107 (paclitaxel 2.5%). Conclusions: DHP107 as a second-line treatment of AGC was non-inferior to paclitaxel for PFS; other efficacy and safety parameters were comparable. DHP107 is the first oral paclitaxel with proven efficacy/safety for the treatment of AGC. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01839773.

Randomized phase II study of axitinib versus placebo plus best supportive care in second-line treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of axitinib, a potent and selective vascular endothelial growth factor receptors 1-3 inhibitor, combined with best supportive care (BSC) was evaluated in a global, randomized, placebo-controlled phase II trial in patients with locally advanced or metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with HCC and Child-Pugh Class A who progressed on or were intolerant to one prior antiangiogenic therapy were stratified by tumour invasion (presence/absence of extrahepatic spread and/or vascular invasion) and region (Asian/non-Asian) and randomized (2:1) to axitinib/BSC (starting dose 5 mg twice-daily) or placebo/BSC. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). RESULTS: The estimated hazard ratio for OS was 0.907 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.646-1.274; one-sided stratified P = 0.287] for axitinib/BSC (n = 134) versus placebo/BSC (n = 68), with the median (95% CI) of 12.7 (10.2-14.9) versus 9.7 (5.9-11.8) months, respectively. Results of prespecified subgroup analyses in Asian versus non-Asian patients or presence versus absence of tumour invasion were consistent with the overall population. Improvements favouring axitinib/BSC (P < 0.01) were observed in secondary efficacy end point analyses [progression-free survival (PFS), time to tumour progression (TTP), and clinical benefit rate (CBR)], and were retained among Asian patients in the prespecified subgroup analyses. Overall response rate did not differ significantly between treatments and patient-reported outcomes favoured placebo/BSC. Most common all-causality adverse events with axitinib/BSC were diarrhoea (54%), hypertension (54%), and decreased appetite (47%). Baseline serum analyses identified potential new prognostic (interleukin-6, E-selectin, interleukin-8, angiopoietin-2, migration inhibitory factor, and c-MET) or predictive (E-selectin and stromal-derived factor-1) factors for survival. CONCLUSIONS: Axitinib/BSC did not improve OS over placebo/BSC in the overall population or in stratification subgroups. However, axitinib/BSC resulted in significantly longer PFS and TTP and higher CBR, with acceptable toxicity in patients with advanced HCC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01210495.

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.

A phase IIa dose-finding and safety study of first-line pertuzumab in combination with trastuzumab, capecitabine and cisplatin in patients with HER2-positive advanced gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: Pertuzumab plus trastuzumab provides a more comprehensive blockade of HER2 signalling than trastuzumab alone. Therefore, we conducted a phase IIa study of the pharmacokinetics and safety of pertuzumab plus trastuzumab and chemotherapy in advanced gastric cancer (aGC). METHODS: Patients received pertuzumab 840 mg for cycle 1 and 420 mg q3w for cycles 2-6 (Arm A) or pertuzumab 840 mg q3w for six cycles (Arm B). Trastuzumab, cisplatin and capecitabine were also given for six cycles, then trastuzumab q3w until disease progression or unmanageable toxicity. The co-primary endpoints were day 43 pertuzumab serum trough concentration (Cmin) and safety. RESULTS: Thirty patients were randomised. Mean pertuzumab Cmin at day 43 was 40.0 µg ml(-1) (s.d.: 17.3) in Arm A and 62.7 µg ml(-1) (29.1) in Arm B. Mean day 43 Cmin in Arm A was ~37% lower than that seen in metastatic breast cancer. The safety profiles were similar between arms and treatment was well tolerated. Partial responses were achieved by 86% and 55% of patients in Arms A and B, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of the pharmacokinetic and safety data, the 840 mg q3w pertuzumab dose has been selected for a phase III study of pertuzumab, trastuzumab and chemotherapy in HER2-positive aGC.

Analysis of serum protein biomarkers, circulating tumor DNA, and dovitinib activity in patients with tyrosine kinase inhibitor-refractory gastrointestinal stromal tumors.

BACKGROUND: An exploratory translational analysis was conducted as part of a phase II study of dovitinib to assess the relevance of soluble serum proteins and circulating tumor (ct) DNA (ctDNA) as biomarkers in patients with tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI)-refractory gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Predose serum samples were collected from 30 patients on day 1 of cycle 1 and cycle 2. Serum levels of angiogenesis-related proteins were assessed by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, and Beads, emulsions, amplification, and magnetics (BEAMing) assays were carried out to detect mutations in serum ctDNA. RESULTS: Dovitinib increased vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)165 (1.26-fold, P = 0.006), VEGF-A (1.27-fold, P = 0.004), placental growth factor (6.0-fold, P = 0.002), fibroblast growth factor 23 (1.45-fold, P = 0.02), and interleukin 8 (1.75-fold, P = 0.04) levels, and decreased soluble vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (sVEGFR)-2 levels (0.8-fold, P = 0.001). The changes in sVEGFR-2 were significantly associated with metabolic response determined by positron emission tomography (P = 0.02) and progression-free survival (PFS; P = 0.02). Secondary kinase mutations were identified in the ctDNA of 11 patients (41%), and these patients all had mutations involving KIT exon 17. Patients with secondary KIT mutations had significantly worse overall survival {median, 5.5 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 3.8-7.2 months]} than those with no detectable secondary mutations [9.8 months (95% CI 9.6-10.0 months); hazard ratio = 2.7 (95% CI 1.0-7.3); P = 0.047]. CONCLUSIONS: Changes in sVEGFR-2 levels were associated with dovitinib-mediated antitumor activity. Genotyping of serum ctDNA with BEAMing is useful for the identification of resistant mutations potentially associated with poor prognosis in patients with GISTs.

IL-23 promotes osteoclastogenesis in osteoblast-osteoclast co-culture system.

The aim of this study was to determine the effect of IL-23 on the activity and proliferation of osteoclasts (OC) in co-culture with osteoblasts (OB). OB and OC were individually separated from the skull and femoral bone of a SD rat. OB-OC co-culture with IL-23 added was designed as the experimental group, while the OB-OC co-culture without IL-23 was the control group. In the experimental group, five different concentrations of IL-23 were added, and the cells were then cultured for 24, 48 and 72 h. For each concentration at these three time points, cell proliferation, tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase (TRAP) activity and the lacunae in the bone slices were evaluated, compared with control group at the same time points. Compared to the control group, proliferation and TRAP activity of OC were significantly increased at 24, 48 and 72 h with addition of 0.5 to 10 ng/mL IL-23 (P<0.05). In addition, a dose- and time-dependent correlation between the effect of IL-23 and osteoclastogenesis was noticed though the comparison. Moreover, the area of lacunar resorption in each experimental group was significantly larger than in the control group (P<0.05). In conclusion, IL-23 promotes the proliferation, TRAP activity and bone resorption of OC in OB-OC co-culture.

Health-related quality of life in patients with CLDN18.2-positive, locally advanced unresectable or metastatic gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma: results from the SPOTLIGHT and GLOW clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: First-line zolbetuximab plus chemotherapy (SPOTLIGHT, mFOLFOX6; GLOW, CAPOX) significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) versus placebo plus chemotherapy in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, locally advanced unresectable or metastatic gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma whose tumors were claudin 18 isoform 2-positive in the phase III SPOTLIGHT (NCT03504397) and GLOW (NCT03653507) studies. We present patient-reported outcomes (PROs) from these studies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was measured in the full analysis sets using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life of Cancer Patients Core Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) and Oesophago-Gastric Module (QLQ-OG25), Global Pain, and 5-level EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaires. Analyses focused on key PRO domains: global health status (GHS)/QoL, physical functioning, abdominal pain and discomfort, and nausea/vomiting. Least squares mean (LSM) changes from baseline and time to first definitive deterioration (TTDD) were evaluated combined across SPOTLIGHT and GLOW and for individual studies. Time to confirmed deterioration (TTCD) was evaluated independently for SPOTLIGHT and GLOW. RESULTS: The combined analysis set included 1072 patients (zolbetuximab plus chemotherapy, 537; placebo plus chemotherapy, 535). Compliance rates were similar between treatment arms. Similar trends were observed in the zolbetuximab versus placebo arms for LSM changes from baseline in key PRO domains, with no clinically meaningful deterioration. Nausea/vomiting worsened during the first few zolbetuximab cycles but later returned to baseline levels. Overall TTCD and TTDD results were similar between arms in both studies. CONCLUSIONS: Patients in SPOTLIGHT and GLOW maintained measured HRQoL relative to baseline when treated with first-line zolbetuximab added to chemotherapy. Zolbetuximab plus chemotherapy improved PFS and OS without negatively affecting HRQoL in key PRO domains compared with placebo plus chemotherapy.

Phase II study of dovitinib in patients with metastatic and/or unresectable gastrointestinal stromal tumours after failure of imatinib and sunitinib.

BACKGROUND: This prospective, phase II trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of dovitinib in patients with metastatic and/or unresectable gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GISTs) after failure of at least imatinib and sunitinib. METHODS: Patients received oral dovitinib, 500 mg once daily, for 5 consecutive days, followed by a 2-day rest, every 28 days. The primary endpoint was disease control rate (DCR; objective response+stable disease (SD)) at 24 weeks, assessed by computed tomography (CT) scan according to RECIST v1.0. Metabolic response was evaluated by positron emission tomography (PET)-CT scans performed at baseline and after 4 weeks of treatment. RESULTS: Between September 2011 and April 2012, 30 patients were enrolled. DCR at 24 weeks by RECIST v1.0 was 13% and one patient (3%) had a partial response. Based on the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer PET response criteria, four patients (13%) had a metabolic partial response after 4 weeks of treatment. At a median follow-up of 8.3 months (range, 6.3-12.2 months), median progression-free survival (PFS) was 3.6 months (95% confidence interval (CI), 3.5-3.7 months) and median overall survival was 9.7 months (95% CI, 6.0-13.4 months). Metabolic progressive disease at Week 4 was significantly associated with shorter PFS (P=0.03). Grade 3/4 adverse events included asthenia (20%), neutropenia (13%), thrombocytopenia (10%), and hypertriglyceridaemia (10%). Most toxicities were manageable by dose modification. CONCLUSION: Dovitinib showed modest antitumour activity with manageable toxicities in heavily pretreated patients with advanced GISTs.

Adjuvant chemotherapy for gastric cancer: a randomised phase 3 trial of mitomycin-C plus either short-term doxifluridine or long-term doxifluridine plus cisplatin after curative D2 gastrectomy (AMC0201).

BACKGROUND: This phase 3 study evaluated the efficacy of new adjuvant chemotherapy (MFP), which intensified the mitomycin-C (MMC) plus short-term doxifluridine (Mf) for gastric cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 855 patients (424 in Mf, 431 in MFP) with pathological stage II-IV (M0) gastric cancer after D2 gastrectomy were randomly assigned to receive either Mf (MMC 20 mg m(-2), followed by oral doxifluridine 460-600 mg m(-2) per day for 3 months) or MFP (MMC 20 mg m(-2), followed by oral doxifluridine 460-600 mg m(-2) per day for 12 months with 6 monthly infusions of 60 mg m(-2) of cisplatin) chemotherapy. RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 6.6 years, there was no difference between the two groups in recurrence-free survival (RFS) (5-year RFS 61.1% in Mf and 57.9% in MFP; hazard ratio 1.10 (95% CI 0.89-1.35); P=0.39) and overall survival (OS) (5-year OS 66.5% in Mf and 65.0% in MFP; hazard ratio 1.11 (95% CI 0.89-1.39); P=0.33). CONCLUSION: Intensification of Mf adjuvant chemotherapy by prolonging the duration of oral fluoropyrimidine and adding cisplatin was safe but not effective to improve the survivals in curatively resected gastric cancer patients.

A randomized phase II study of PEP02 (MM-398), irinotecan or docetaxel as a second-line therapy in patients with locally advanced or metastatic gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: PEP02 is a novel highly stable liposomal nanocarrier formulation of irinotecan. This randomized phase II study evaluated the efficacy and safety of single agent PEP02 compared with irinotecan or docetaxel in the second-line treatment of advanced oesophago-gastric (OG) cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with locally advanced/metastatic disease who had failed one prior chemotherapy regimen were randomly assigned to PEP02 120 mg/m(2), irinotecan 300 mg/m(2) or docetaxel (Taxotere) 75 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR). Simon's two-stage design was used and the ORR of interest was 20% (α = 0.05, type II error ß = 0.10, null hypothesis of ORR was 5%). RESULTS: Forty-four patients per arm received treatment, and 124 were assessable for response. The ORR statistical threshold for the first stage was reached in all arms. In the intent-to-treat (ITT) population, ORRs were 13.6% (6/44), 6.8% (3/44) and 15.9% (7/44) in the PEP02, irinotecan and docetaxel arms, respectively. The median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival were similar between the trial arms. Commonest grade 3-4 adverse event reported was diarrhoea in the PEP02 and irinotecan groups (27.3% versus 18.2%). CONCLUSION: The ORR associated with PEP02 was comparable with docetaxel and numerically greater than that of irinotecan. PEP02 warrants further evaluation in the advanced gastric cancer setting.

Aberrant methylation of donor genome in cloned bovine embryos.

Despite recent successes in cloning various animal species, the use of somatic cells as the source of donor nuclei has raised many practically relevant questions such as increased abortion rates, high birth weight and perinatal death. These anomalies may be caused by incomplete epigenetic reprogramming of donor DNA. Genome-wide demethylation occurs during early development, 'erasing' gamete-specific methylation patterns inherited from the parents. This process may be a prerequisite for the formation of pluripotent stem cells that are important for the later development. Here, we provide evidence that cloned bovine embryos may have impaired epigenetic reprogramming capabilities. We found highly aberrant methylation patterns in various genomic regions of cloned embryos. Cloned blastocysts closely resembled donor cells in their overall genomic methylation status, which was very different from that of normal blastocysts produced in vitro or in vivo. We found demethylation of the Bov-B long interspersed nuclear element sequence in normal embryos, but not in cloned embryos, in which the donor-type methylation was simply maintained during preimplantation development. There were also significant variations in the degree of methylation among individual cloned blastocysts. Our findings indicate that the developmental anomalies of cloned embryos could be due to incomplete epigenetic reprogramming of donor genomic DNA.