Phase III randomized trial comparing palliative systemic therapy to best supportive care in advanced esophageal/GEJ cancer.

No study has unequivocally proven that chemotherapy prolongs overall survival (OS) in advanced esophageal cancer. We conducted a Phase III randomized study in first-line advanced unresectable/metastatic esophageal/GEJ cancer. Patients aged 18-70 years, with performance status 0-2, were randomized to best supportive care (BSC) alone, or BSC with weekly paclitaxel 80 mg/m2. BSC comprised, as indicated, education, counselling, radiation, stenting, feeding tube placement, nutritional supplementation, medications like analgesics, and referral to a support group and palliative care. The primary endpoint was OS; secondary endpoints included progression free survival (PFS), response, toxicity, and QoL. Between May 2016-December 2020, we recruited 281 patients: 143 to chemotherapy and 138 to BSC. Histopathology was squamous in 269 (95.7%) patients. Median number of paclitaxel doses was 12 (IQR, 7-23). Median OS was 4.2 months (95% CI, 3.42-5.32) in BSC, and 9.2 months (95% CI, 8.02-10.48) in chemotherapy; HR, 0.49 (95% CI, 0.39-0.64); p < .001. As compared to BSC, chemotherapy increased response (2.9% to 39%), median PFS (2.1 to 4.2 months), 1-year OS (11% to 32%), 2-year OS (0 to 9%), median dysphagia-free survival (2.9 to 14.8 months), and global and esophagus-specific QoL, without significantly increasing all-grade or grade ≥3 toxicities. Using ESMO clinical benefit scale and ASCO Value Framework, palliative chemotherapy scored as having "substantial value." Our study provides the first level 1 evidence that chemotherapy prolongs survival in advanced esophageal/GEJ carcinoma. BSC alone is no longer appropriate. Weekly paclitaxel is an attractive option, especially in LMICs with limited access to immunotherapy.

A randomized phase 3 trial comparing nimotuzumab plus cisplatin chemoradiotherapy versus cisplatin chemoradiotherapy alone in locally advanced head and neck cancer.

BACKGROUND: Because the addition of nimotuzumab to chemoradiation in patients with locally advanced head and neck cancer improved outcomes in a phase 2 study, the authors conducted a phase 3 study to confirm these findings. METHODS: This open-label, investigator-initiated, phase 3, randomized trial was conducted from 2012 to 2018. Adult patients with locally advanced head and neck cancer who were fit for radical chemoradiation were randomized 1:1 to receive either radical radiotherapy (66-70 grays) with concurrent weekly cisplatin (30 mg/m2 ) (CRT) or the same schedule of CRT with weekly nimotuzumab (200 mg) (NCRT).The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS); key secondary endpoints were disease-free survival (DFS), duration of locoregional control (LRC), and overall survival (OS). An intent-to-treat analysis also was performed. RESULTS: In total, 536 patients were allocated equally to both treatment arms. The median follow-up was 39.13 months. The addition of nimotuzumab improved PFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.69; 95% CI, 0.53-0.89; P = .004), LRC (HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.50-0.89; P = .006), and DFS (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.55-0.92; P = .008) and had a trend toward improved OS (HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.65-1.08; P = .163). Grade 3 through 5 adverse events were similar between the 2 arms, except for a higher incidence of mucositis in the NCRT arm (66.7% vs 55.8%; P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of nimotuzumab to concurrent weekly CRT improves PFS, LRC, and DFS. This combination provides a novel alternative therapeutic option to a 3-weekly schedule of 100 mg/m2 cisplatin in patients with locally advanced head and neck cancer who are treated with radical-intent CRT.

Long-Term Update of a Phase 3 Randomized Study Comparing Once-a-Week Versus Once-Every-3-Weeks Cisplatin Along With Radiation in Head and Neck Cancer.

PURPOSE: In the weekly-3-weekly study, cisplatin at 100 mg/m2 once-every-3-weeks led to superior locoregional control compared with cisplatin 30 mg/m2 once-a-week in combination with radical radiation for locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (LAHNSCC). We report the updated analysis of the study. METHODS AND MATERIALS: In this phase 3 open-label noninferiority study conducted between 2013 and 2017, 300 patients with LAHNSCC were randomly assigned to receive cisplatin 100 mg/m2 once-in-every-weeks or cisplatin 30 mg/m2 once-a-week, concurrently with radiation. The primary endpoint was locoregional control. Secondary outcomes were overall survival, progression-free survival, and late adverse events. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 6.91 years (95% CI, 6.12-7.36). The updated 2-year and 5-year locoregional control rates for the once-a-week cisplatin arm were 58.75% (95% CI, 51.08-67.58) and 48.09% (95% CI, 40.26-57.43), whereas for the once-every-3-weeks, cisplatin arm were 73.95% (95% CI, 66.93-81.70) and 56.76% (95% CI, 48.46-66.48), respectively, hazard ratio = 1.44 (95% CI, 1.03-2.03), P = .034. The 5-year overall survival was 43.60% (95% CI, 36.29-52.37) in the once-a-week cisplatin arm and 50.55% (95% CI, 43.06-59.35) in the once-every-3-weeks cisplatin arm; P = .19. There was no difference in any grade or grade ≥3 late adverse events between the 2 arms, except for hearing dysfunction, which was significantly more common in patients who received high-dose cisplatin. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term follow-up confirms that cisplatin at 100 mg/m2 administered once-every-3-weeks concurrently with radical radiation for LAHNSCC leads to superior locoregional control compared with cisplatin 30 mg/m2 once-a-week and should remain one of the standard treatment options.

Phase III randomized trial comparing neoadjuvant paclitaxel+platinum to 5-fluorouracil+platinum in esophageal/GEJ squamous cell carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) for locally advanced esophageal/gastroesophageal junction squamous cancer (LAEGSC), 5-fluorouracil (5FU)+platinum, is toxic and logistically challenging; alternative regimens are needed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Phase III randomized open-label non-inferiority trial at Tata Memorial Center, India, in resectable LAEGSC. Patients were randomized 1:1 to three cycles of 3-weekly platinum (cisplatin 75 mg/m2 or carboplatin AUC 6) with paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 (day 1) or 5FU 1000 mg/m2 continuous infusion (days 1-4), followed by surgery. RESULTS: Between August 2014 and June 2022, we enrolled 420 patients; 210 to each arm. Significantly more patients on paclitaxel + platinum (194 (92.3%)] received all 3 chemotherapy cycles than on 5FU+platinum (170 [85.9%]), P = .009. 5FU + platinum caused more grade ≥ 3 toxicities (124 [69.7%]) than paclitaxel + platinum (97 [51.9%]), P = .001. Surgery was performed in 131 (62.4%) patients on 5FU + platinum vs 139 (66.2%) on paclitaxel + platinum, P = .415. Paclitaxel + platinum resulted in higher pathologic primary tumor clearance (33 [25.8%]) vs 17 [15%]; P = .04), and pathologic complete responses in 21.9% compared to 12.4% from 5FU + platinum, P = .053. Median OS was 27.5 months (95% CI, 18.6-43.5) from paclitaxel + platinum, which was non-inferior to 27.1 months (95% CI, 18.8-40.7) from 5FU + platinum; HR, 0.89 (95% CI, 0.72-1.09); P = .346. CONCLUSION: Neoadjuvant paclitaxel + platinum chemotherapy is safer, and results in similar R0 resections, higher pathologic tumor clearance and non-inferior survival, compared to 5FU + platinum. Paclitaxel + platinum should replace 5FU + platinum as NACT for resectable LAEGSC. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRY INDIA NUMBER: CTRI/2014/04/004516.

Phase 3 RCT comparing docetaxel-platinum with docetaxel-platinum-5FU as neoadjuvant chemotherapy in borderline resectable oral cancer.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) with TPF (docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5FU) is one of the treatment options in very locally advanced oral cancer with a survival advantage over PF (cisplatin and 5FU). TP (docetaxel and cisplatin) has shown promising results with a lower rate of adverse events but has never been compared to TPF. METHODS: In this phase 3 randomized superiority study, adult patients with borderline resectable locally advanced oral cancers were randomized in a 1:1 fashion to either TP or TPF. After the administration of 2 cycles, patients were evaluated in a multidisciplinary clinic and further treatment was planned. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) and secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and adverse events. RESULTS: 495 patients were randomized in this study, 248 patients in TP arm and 247 in TPF arm. The 5-year OS was 18.5% (95% CI 13.8-23.7) and 23.9% (95% CI 18.1-30.1) in TP and TPF arms, respectively (Hazard ratio 0.778; 95% CI 0.637-0.952; P = 0.015). Following NACT, 43.8% were deemed resectable, but 34.5% underwent surgery. The 5-year OS was 50.7% (95% CI 41.5-59.1) and 5% (95%CI 2.9-8.1), respectively, in the surgically resected versus unresected cohort post NACT (P < 0.0001). Grade 3 or above adverse events were seen in 97 (39.1%) and 179 (72.5%) patients in the TP and TPF arms, respectively (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: NACT with TPF has a survival benefit over TP in borderline resectable oral cancers, with an increase in toxicity which is manageable. Patients who undergo surgery achieve a relatively good, sustained survival.

Metronomic adjuvant chemotherapy evaluation in locally advanced head and neck cancers post radical chemoradiation - a randomised trial.

Background: Locally advanced head and neck cancers treated with radical chemoradiation have unsatisfactory outcomes. Oral metronomic chemotherapy improves outcomes in comparison to maximum tolerated dose chemotherapy in the palliative setting. Limited evidence suggests that it may do so in an adjuvant setting. Hence this randomized study was conducted. Methods: Patients of head and neck (HN) cancer with primary in oropharynx, larynx or hypopharynx, with PS 0-2 post radical chemoradiation with documented complete response were randomized 1:1 to either observation or oral metronomic adjuvant chemotherapy (MAC) for 18 months. MAC consisted of weekly oral methotrexate (15 mg/m2) and celecoxib (200 mg PO BD). The primary endpoint was OS and the overall sample size was 1038. The study had 3 planned interim analyses for efficacy and futility. Trial registration- Clinical Trials Registry- India (CTRI): CTRI/2016/09/007315 [Registered on: 28/09/2016] Trial Registered Prospectively. Findings: 137 patients were recruited and an interim analysis was done. The 3 year PFS was 68.7% (95% CI 55.1-79.0) versus 60.8% (95% CI 47.9-71.4) in the observation and metronomic arm respectively (P value = 0.230). The hazard ratio was 1.42 (95% CI 0.80-2.51; P value = 0.231). The 3 year OS was 79.4% (95% CI 66.3-87.9) versus 62.4% (95% CI 49.5-72.8) in the observation and metronomic arm respectively (P value = 0.047). The hazard ratio was 1.83 (95% CI 1.0-3.36; P value = 0.051). Interpretation: In this phase 3 randomized study, oral metronomic combinations of weekly methotrexate and daily celecoxib failed to improve the PFS or OS. Hence observation post-complete response post radical chemoradiation remains the standard of care. Funding: ICON funded this study.

Long term outcomes of phase I/II study of palliative triple metronomic chemotherapy in platinum-refractory/early failure oral cancer.

Background: Triple metronomic chemotherapy is one of the options of treatment in platinum-refractory/early failure oral cancer. However, long term outcomes with this regimen are unknown. Methods: Adult patients with platinum-refractory/early-failure oral cancer were enrolled in the study. Patients were administered triple metronomic chemotherapy ie erlotinib 150 mg once daily celecoxib 200 mg twice daily and methotrexate weekly (phase 1 in variable dose 15-6 mg/m2 & 9 mg/m2 in phase 2), all taken orally till progression of disease or development of intolerable adverse events. The primary objective was to estimate the long-term overall survival and factors impacting it. The Kaplan Meier method was used for time-to-event analysis. Cox proportional hazard model was used to identify factors impacting overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). The factors included in the model were age, sex, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group - performance status (ECOG PS), tobacco exposure and a subsite of primary and circulating endothelial cell levels at baseline. A p-value of 0.05 was considered significant. Clinical trials information: CTRI/2016/04/006834. Results: A total of 91 patients were recruited (15 in phase 1 & 76 in phase 2), the median follow-up was 41 months and 84 events of death had occurred. The median OS was 6.7 months (95% CI 5.4-7.4). The 1-year, 2-years and 3-year OS' were 14.1% (95% CI 7.8-22.2), 5.9% (95% CI 2.2-12.2) and 5.9% (95% CI 2.2-12.2) respectively. The only factor favorably impacting OS was the detection of circulating endothelial cells at baseline (HR = 0.46; 95% CI 0.28-0.75, P = 0.0020). The median PFS was 4.3 months (95% CI 4.1-5.1) and the 1-year PFS was 13.0% (95% CI 6.8-21.2). The factors with statistically significant impact on PFS were detection of circulating endothelial cells at baseline (HR = 0.48; 95% CI 0.30-0.78, P = 0.0020) and no tobacco exposure at baseline (HR = 0.51; 95% CI 0.27-0.94, P = 0.030). Interpretation: The long-term outcomes with triple oral metronomic chemotherapy ie erlotinib, methotrexate and celecoxib are unsatisfactory. Detection of circulating endothelial cells at baseline is a biomarker predicting efficacy of this therapy. Funding: The study was funded by an intramural grant from Tata Memorial Center Research Administration Council (TRAC) and Terry Fox foundation.

Repurposing pantoprazole in combination with systemic therapy in advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: a phase I/II randomized study.

Pantoprazole decreases the acidity of the tumor microenvironment by inhibiting proton pumps on the cancer cell. This possibly leads to increased sensitivity to cytotoxic therapy. We conducted a phase I/II randomized controlled trial in adult patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) planned for first-line palliative chemotherapy. Patients were randomized to chemotherapy + / - intravenous (IV) pantoprazole. The primary endpoint in phase I was to determine the maximum safe dose of intravenous pantoprazole, whereas it was progression-free survival (PFS) in phase II. The dose of IV pantoprazole established in phase I was 240 mg. Between Nov'18 and Oct'20, we recruited 120 patients in phase II, 59 on pantoprazole and 61 on the standard arm. Median age was 51 years (IQR 43-60), 80% were men. Systemic therapy was IV cisplatin in 22% and oral-metronomic-chemotherapy (OMC) in 78%. Addition of pantoprazole did not prolong PFS, which was 2.2 months (95% CI 2.07-3.19) in the pantoprazole arm and 2.5 months (95% CI 2.04-3.81, HR, 1.14; 95% CI 0.78-1.66; P = 0.48) in the standard arm. Response rates were similar; pantoprazole arm 8.5%, standard arm 6.6%; P = 0.175. Overall survival was also similar; 5.6 months (95% CI 4.47-8.51) in the pantoprazole arm and 5.4 months (95% CI 3.48-8.54, HR 1.06; 95% CI 0.72-1.57; P = 0.75) in the standard arm. Grade ≥ 3 toxicities were similar. Thus, pantoprazole 240 mg IV added to systemic therapy does not improve outcomes in patients with advanced HNSCC.

Low-Dose Immunotherapy in Head and Neck Cancer: A Randomized Study.

PURPOSE: The regimens approved for the treatment of advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma are accessible to only 1%-3% of patients in low- and middle-income countries because of their cost. In our previous study, metronomic chemotherapy improved survival in this setting. Retrospective data suggest that a low dose of nivolumab may be efficacious. Hence, we aimed to assess whether the addition of low-dose nivolumab to triple metronomic chemotherapy (TMC) improved overall survival (OS). METHODS: This was a randomized phase III superiority study. Adult patients with recurrent or newly diagnosed advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma being treated with palliative intent with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1 were eligible. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to TMC consisting of oral methotrexate 9 mg/m2 once a week, celecoxib 200 mg twice daily, and erlotinib 150 mg once daily, or TMC with intravenous nivolumab (TMC-I) 20 mg flat dose once every 3 weeks. The primary end point was 1-year OS. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-one patients were randomly assigned, 75 in TMC and 76 in the TMC-I arm. The addition of low-dose nivolumab led to an improvement in the 1-year OS from 16.3% (95% CI, 8.0 to 27.4) to 43.4% (95% CI, 30.8 to 55.3; hazard ratio, 0.545; 95% CI, 0.362 to 0.820; P = .0036). The median OS in TMC and TMC-I arms was 6.7 months (95% CI, 5.8 to 8.1) and 10.1 months (95% CI, 7.4 to 12.6), respectively (P = .0052). The rate of grade 3 and above adverse events was 50% and 46.1% in TMC and TMC-I arms, respectively (P = .744). CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the first-ever randomized study to demonstrate that the addition of low-dose nivolumab to metronomic chemotherapy improved OS and is an alternative standard of care for those who cannot access full-dose checkpoint inhibitors.

Results of Phase III Randomized Trial for Use of Docetaxel as a Radiosensitizer in Patients With Head and Neck Cancer, Unsuitable for Cisplatin-Based Chemoradiation.

PURPOSE: There is a lack of published literature on systemic therapeutic options in cisplatin-ineligible patients with locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (LAHNSCC) undergoing chemoradiation. Docetaxel was assessed as a radiosensitizer in this situation. METHODS: This was a randomized phase II/III study. Adult patients (age ≥ 18 years) with LAHNSCC planned for chemoradiation and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 and who were cisplatin-ineligible were randomly assigned in 1:1 to either radiation alone or radiation with concurrent docetaxel 15 mg/m2 once weekly for a maximum of seven cycles. The primary end point was 2-year disease-free survival (DFS). RESULTS: The study recruited 356 patients between July 2017 and May 2021. The 2-year DFS was 30.3% (95% CI, 23.6 to 37.4) versus 42% (95% CI, 34.6 to 49.2) in the RT and Docetaxel-RT arms, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.673; 95% CI, 0.521 to 0.868; P value = .002). The corresponding median overall survival (OS) was 15.3 months (95% CI, 13.1 to 22.0) and 25.5 months (95% CI, 17.6 to 32.5), respectively (log-rank P value = .035). The 2-year OS was 41.7% (95% CI, 34.1 to 49.1) versus 50.8% (95% CI, 43.1 to 58.1) in the RT and Docetaxel-RT arms, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.747; 95% CI, 0.569 to 0.980; P value = .035). There was a higher incidence of grade 3 or above mucositis (22.2% v 49.7%; P < .001), odynophagia (33.5% v 52.5%; P < .001), and dysphagia (33% v 49.7%; P = .002) with the addition of docetaxel. CONCLUSION: The addition of docetaxel to radiation improved DFS and OS in cisplatin-ineligible patients with LAHNSCC.[Media: see text].

Quality of life in patients with locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma undergoing concurrent chemoradiation with once-a-week versus once-every-3-weeks cisplatin.

INTRODUCTION: This trial was conducted to compare the efficacy of low dose once-a-week cisplatin and once-every-3-weeks cisplatin with radiation in locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (LAHNSCC). The current analysis focuses on the quality of life (QoL) of patients in this trial. METHODS: In this phase III randomized trial, patients with nonmetastatic LAHNSCC were randomized to receive cisplatin 30 mg/m2 once-a-week or 100 mg/m2 once every- 3-weeks concurrently with radiotherapy. The primary endpoint was locoregional control. QoL was a key secondary endpoint. QoL was assessed using EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-H&N35. QoL data were assessed at baseline, days 22 and 43 during treatment; and at 6, 12, 24 months. The linear mixed-effects model was used for longitudinal analysis of QoL to determine the impact of treatment (arm) and time on QoL. RESULTS: Three hundred patients were enrolled, data of 150 patients with available baseline QoL were analyzed. There was no significant difference in the global health status/QoL of the two treatment arms (p = 0.8664). There was no significant difference in the longitudinal QoL scores between the two treatment arms in all scales except constipation (p = 0.0096), less sexuality (p = 0.0002,), and financial difficulty (p = 0.0219). There was a worsening of the QoL scores in all scales in both arms during treatment, which improved after treatment completion in most scales. CONCLUSION: The use of once-every-3-weeks cisplatin did not adversely impact QoL as compared to once-a-week cisplatin in combination with radiotherapy in LAHNSCC.

Audit of screen failure in 15 randomised studies from a low and middle-income country.

Background: Growth and development in patient management occurs via randomised studies. Screen failure is a significant hurdle while conducting randomised studies. There is limited data available from low and middle-income countries about factors resulting in screen failure. Hence, this audit was performed to identify the proportion of patients who screen failed and to elucidate reasons for the same. Methods: This was an audit of 15 randomised studies performed by medical oncology solid tumour unit II of Tata Memorial Centre. The screening logs of these studies were acquired. From the screening logs, data regarding the number of patients who had screen failed & reason for the same were obtained. Descriptive statistics were performed. Results: A total of 7,481 patients were screened for 15 randomised clinical studies. Out of these, 3,666 (49.0%) patients were enrolled into trials and 3,815 (51.0%) screen failed. The most common reason for screen failure was 'not meeting inclusion criteria' (54.9%) followed by declining to take treatment (22.2%). Other factors that affect enrolment were 'not willing to stay in the locality of the trial site' (6.2%), being recruited in other studies (3.7%), poor performance status (PS) (3.4%), non-compliance (2.2%), meeting exclusion criteria (0.9%) and 'other' (6.5%). Conclusion: The commonest causes of screen failure in lower and middle-income countries are non-meeting of inclusion criteria followed by declining to take treatment, not willing to stay in locality of trial site, recruited into other studies, poor PS, non-compliance, meeting exclusion criteria & 'other'. This information would help analysing and hence planning of newer strategies to decrease the rate of screen failure.

RMAC study: A randomized study for evaluation of metronomic adjuvant chemotherapy in recurrent head and neck cancers post salvage surgical resection in those who are ineligible for re-irradiation.

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant re-chemoradiation after salvage surgery improves disease-free survival in recurrent head and neck cancer. However, most patients are ineligible for re-irradiation and are kept on observation. We investigated the efficacy of metronomic adjuvant chemotherapy (MAC) in this group of patients compared to observation. METHODS: This was a randomized integrated phase II/III clinical trial. Adults with recurrent head and neck cancer, who had undergone salvage surgery, but were ineligible for adjuvant re-irradiation were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either MAC arm or observation. MAC consisted of weekly oral methotrexate (at a dose of 15 mg per square meter of body surface area) and celecoxib (at a dose of 200 mg orally twice daily) for 6 months. The primary endpoint of phase 2 was disease-free survival (DFS) while that of phase 3 was overall survival (OS). For phase 2, to detect an improvement in the hazard ratio (HR) 0.67 with MAC, with a type 1 error of 10% (1-sided), type 2 error of 30%, 105 patients were required. While for phase 3, with a target HR of 0.77, with a type 1 error of 5%, type 2 error of 20%, 318 patients were required. Here we report the results of phase 2 part of the study. RESULTS: At a median follow up of 30.2 months (95% confidence interval (CI), 25.3 to 35.1) the 1 year and 2-year DFS were 57.4% (95% CI, 42.8-69.5) and 37.6% (95% CI, 24.1-51) in MAC arm whereas the corresponding numbers were 62.3% (95% CI, 47.8 to 73.8) and 54.2%(95% CI, 39.8 to 66.5) in observation arm, respectively (hazard ratio for progression, 1.45; 95% CI, 0.87 to 2.47; P = 0.15). In the MAC arm, the 1 and 2 year OS was 78.7% (95% CI, 64.9 to 87.6) and 48% (95% CI, 34.1 to 62).The corresponding figures in the observation arm were 79.2% (95% CI, 65.7 to 87.9) and 65.5% (95% CI, 50.9 to 76.7) (hazard ratio for death, 1.7, 95% CI, 0.94 to 3.08; P = 0.08). CONCLUSION: The adjuvant 6-month metronomic schedule was ineffective in improving outcomes in recurrent head and neck cancers post salvage surgery who are ineligible for re-radiation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trial registry of India (CTRI)- CTRI/2016/04/006872 [Registered on 26/4/2016].

Low-cost oral metronomic chemotherapy versus intravenous cisplatin in patients with recurrent, metastatic, inoperable head and neck carcinoma: an open-label, parallel-group, non-inferiority, randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Regimens for palliation in patients with head and neck cancer recommended by the US National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) have low applicability (less than 1-3%) in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) because of their cost. In a previous phase 2 study, patients with head and neck cancer who received metronomic chemotherapy had better outcomes when compared with those who received intravenous cisplatin, which is commonly used as the standard of care in LMICs. We aimed to do a phase 3 study to substantiate these findings. METHODS: We did an open-label, parallel-group, non-inferiority, randomised, phase 3 trial at the Department of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Center, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India. We enrolled adult patients (aged 18-70 years) who planned to receive palliative systemic treatment for relapsed, recurrent, or newly diagnosed squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck, and who had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0-1 and measurable disease, as defined by the Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors. We randomly assigned (1:1) participants to receive either oral metronomic chemotherapy, consisting of 15 mg/m2 methotrexate once per week plus 200 mg celecoxib twice per day until disease progression or until the development of intolerable side-effects, or 75 mg/m2 intravenous cisplatin once every 3 weeks for six cycles. Randomisation was done by use of a computer-generated randomisation sequence, with a block size of four, and patients were stratified by primary tumour site and previous cancer-directed treatment. The primary endpoint was median overall survival. Assuming that 6-month overall survival in the intravenous cisplatin group would be 40%, a non-inferiority margin of 13% was defined. Both intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses were done. All patients who completed at least one cycle of the assigned treatment were included in the safety analysis. This trial is registered with the Clinical Trials Registry-India, CTRI/2015/11/006388, and is completed. FINDINGS: Between May 16, 2016, and Jan 17, 2020, 422 patients were randomly assigned: 213 to the oral metronomic chemotherapy group and 209 to the intravenous cisplatin group. All 422 patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis, and 418 patients (211 in the oral metronomic chemotherapy group and 207 in the intravenous cisplatin group) were included in the per-protocol analysis. At a median follow-up of 15·73 months, median overall survival in the intention-to-treat analysis population was 7·5 months (IQR 4·6-12·6) in the oral metronomic chemotherapy group compared with 6·1 months (3·2-9·6) in the intravenous cisplatin group (unadjusted HR for death 0·773 [95% CI 0·615-0·97, p=0·026]). In the per-protocol analysis population, median overall survival was 7·5 months (4·7-12·8) in the oral metronomic chemotherapy group and 6·1 months (3·4-9·6) in the intravenous cisplatin group (unadjusted HR for death 0·775 [95% CI 0·616-0·974, p=0·029]). Grade 3 or higher adverse events were observed in 37 (19%) of 196 patients in the oral metronomic chemotherapy group versus 61 (30%) of 202 patients in the intravenous cisplatin group (p=0·01). INTERPRETATION: Oral metronomic chemotherapy is non-inferior to intravenous cisplatin with respect to overall survival in head and neck cancer in the palliative setting, and is associated with fewer adverse events. It therefore represents a new alternative standard of care if current NCCN-approved options for palliative therapy are not feasible. FUNDING: Tata Memorial Center Research Administration Council. TRANSLATIONS: For the Hindi, Marathi, Gujarati, Kannada, Malayalam, Telugu, Oriya, Bengali, and Punjabi translations of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Phase I/II Study of Palliative Triple Metronomic Chemotherapy in Platinum-Refractory/Early-Failure Oral Cancer.

PURPOSE: Platinum-resistant oral cancer has a dismal outcome with limited treatment options. We conducted a phase I/II study to identify the optimal biologic dose (OBD) of methotrexate when given along with erlotinib and celecoxib and to assess the efficacy of this three-drug regimen in advanced oral cancer. METHODS: Patients with platinum-resistant or early-failure squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity were eligible for this study. They were orally administered erlotinib 150 mg once per day, celecoxib 200 mg twice per day, and methotrexate per week. The primary end point of phase I was to determine the OBD of methotrexate, and that of phase II was to determine the 3-month progression-free survival. The OBD of methotrexate was determined on the basis of the clinical benefit rate at 2 months and circulating endothelial cell level at day 8, using a de-escalation model. Pharmacokinetic evaluation was performed during phase I. Phase II consisted of an expansion cohort of 76 patients. RESULTS: Fifteen patients were recruited in phase I, and 9 mg/m2 methotrexate was identified as the OBD. A total of 91 patients were recruited, and the median follow-up was 6.8 months (range, 0 to 16.8 months). The 3-month progression-free survival rate was 71.1% (95% CI, 60.5% to 79.3%), the 6-month overall survival rate was 61.2% (95% CI, 49.2% to 67.8%), and the response rate was 42.9% (95% CI, 33.2% to 53.1%; n = 39). The mean Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Head and Neck Trial Outcome Index score at day 8 was improved by 6.1 units (standard deviation, 13.6 units) and was maintained around this magnitude (P = .001). CONCLUSION: Triple oral metronomic chemotherapy with erlotinib, methotrexate, and celecoxib is efficacious in platinum-refractory oral cavity cancers and represents a new therapeutic option in patients with poor prognosis.

Once-a-Week Versus Once-Every-3-Weeks Cisplatin Chemoradiation for Locally Advanced Head and Neck Cancer: A Phase III Randomized Noninferiority Trial.

Purpose Chemoradiation with cisplatin 100 mg/m2 given once every 3 weeks is the standard of care in locally advanced head and neck squamous cell cancer (LAHNSCC). Increasingly, low-dose once-a-week cisplatin is substituted because of perceived lower toxicity and convenience. However, there is no level 1 evidence of comparable efficacy to cisplatin once every 3 weeks. Patients and Methods In this phase III randomized trial, we assessed the noninferiority of cisplatin 30 mg/m2 given once a week compared with cisplatin 100 mg/m2 given once every 3 weeks, both administered concurrently with curative intent radiotherapy in patients with LAHNSCC. The primary end point was locoregional control (LRC); secondary end points included toxicity, compliance, response, progression-free survival, and overall survival. Results Between 2013 and 2017, we randomly assigned 300 patients, 150 to each arm. Two hundred seventy-nine patients (93%) received chemoradiotherapy in the adjuvant setting. At a median follow-up of 22 months, the estimated cumulative 2-year LRC rate was 58.5% in the once-a-week arm and 73.1% in the once-every-3-weeks arm, leading to an absolute difference of 14.6% (95% CI, 5.7% to 23.5%); P = .014; hazard ratio (HR), 1.76 (95% CI, 1.11 to 2.79). Acute toxicities of grade 3 or higher occurred in 71.6% of patients in the once-a-week arm and in 84.6% of patients in the once-every-3-weeks arm ( P = .006). Estimated median progression-free survival in the once-a-week arm was 17.7 months (95% CI, 0.42 to 35.05 months) and in the once-every-3-weeks arm, 28.6 months (95% CI, 15.90 to 41.30 months); HR, 1.24 (95% CI, 0.89 to 1.73); P = .21. Estimated median overall survival in the once-a-week arm was 39.5 months and was not reached in the once-every-3-weeks arm (HR, 1.14 [95% CI, 0.79 to 1.65]; P = .48). Conclusion Once-every-3-weeks cisplatin at 100 mg/m2 resulted in superior LRC, albeit with more toxicity, than did once-a-week cisplatin at 30 mg/m2, and should remain the preferred chemoradiotherapy regimen for LAHNSCC in the adjuvant setting.