Pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy for previously untreated, PD-L1-expressing, locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (KEYNOTE-042): a randomised, open-label, controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: First-line pembrolizumab monotherapy improves overall and progression-free survival in patients with untreated metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer with a programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) tumour proportion score (TPS) of 50% or greater. We investigated overall survival after treatment with pembrolizumab monotherapy in patients with a PD-L1 TPS of 1% or greater. METHODS: This randomised, open-label, phase 3 study was done in 213 medical centres in 32 countries. Eligible patients were adults (≥18 years) with previously untreated locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer without a sensitising EGFR mutation or ALK translocation and with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status score of 0 or 1, life expectancy 3 months or longer, and a PD-L1 TPS of 1% or greater. Randomisation was computer generated, accessed via an interactive voice-response and integrated web-response system, and stratified by region of enrolment (east Asia vs rest of world), ECOG performance status score (0 vs 1), histology (squamous vs non-squamous), and PD-L1 TPS (≥50% vs 1-49%). Enrolled patients were randomly assigned 1:1 in blocks of four per stratum to receive pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks for up to 35 cycles or the investigator's choice of platinum-based chemotherapy for four to six cycles. Primary endpoints were overall survival in patients with a TPS of 50% or greater, 20% or greater, and 1% or greater (one-sided significance thresholds, p=0·0122, p=0·0120, and p=0·0124, respectively) in the intention-to-treat population, assessed sequentially if the previous findings were significant. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02220894. FINDINGS: From Dec 19, 2014, to March 6, 2017, 1274 patients (902 men, 372 women, median age 63 years [IQR 57-69]) with a PD-L1 TPS of 1% or greater were allocated to pembrolizumab (n=637) or chemotherapy (n=637) and included in the intention-to-treat population. 599 (47%) had a TPS of 50% or greater and 818 patients (64%) had a TPS of 20% or greater. As of Feb 26, 2018, median follow-up was 12·8 months. Overall survival was significantly longer in the pembrolizumab group than in the chemotherapy group in all three TPS populations (≥50% hazard ratio 0·69, 95% CI 0·56-0·85, p=0·0003; ≥20% 0·77, 0·64-0·92, p=0·0020, and ≥1% 0·81, 0·71-0·93, p=0·0018). The median surival values by TPS population were 20·0 months (95% CI 15·4-24·9) for pembrolizumab versus 12·2 months (10·4-14·2) for chemotherapy, 17·7 months (15·3-22·1) versus 13·0 months (11·6-15·3), and 16·7 months (13·9-19·7) versus 12·1 months (11·3-13·3), respectively. Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or worse occurred in 113 (18%) of 636 treated patients in the pembrolizumab group and in 252 (41%) of 615 in the chemotherapy group and led to death in 13 (2%) and 14 (2%) patients, respectively. INTERPRETATION: The benefit-to-risk profile suggests that pembrolizumab monotherapy can be extended as first-line therapy to patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer without sensitising EGFR or ALK alterations and with low PD-L1 TPS. FUNDING: Merck Sharp & Dohme.

Efficacy of ginger for prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in breast cancer patients receiving adriamycin-cyclophosphamide regimen: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to determine the efficacy of ginger for reducing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in breast cancer patients receiving adriamycin and cyclophosphamide (AC) regimens. METHODS: We enrolled breast cancer patients receiving AC who experienced moderate to severe nausea or vomiting during the first chemotherapy cycle. Subjects were randomized to receive a 500-mg ginger capsule or placebo twice a day for 5 days starting on the first day of the second AC cycle and were switched to the other treatment in the third cycle. All participants also received ondansetron and dexamethasone for CINV prophylaxis. Nausea severity was recorded once a day during the first 5 days of each cycle. The primary outcome was reduction in nausea score. RESULTS: Thirty-four subjects (68 cycles of AC) were enrolled. Mean (range) maximum nausea score in the first AC cycle was 58 (40-90). Thirty-three subjects (97 %) received the same AC doses in the second as in the third cycle. Mean (±standard error) maximum nausea scores in patients receiving ginger and placebo were 35.36 (±4.43) and 32.17 (±3.71), respectively. The difference in mean maximum nausea scores was 3 (95 % confidence interval, -3 to 9; P = 0.3). There were no significant differences between ginger and placebo in terms of vomiting incidence and severity, rescue medication use, chemotherapy compliance, and adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Ginger (500 mg) twice daily was safe, but conferred no additional benefit in terms of reducing nausea severity in breast cancer patients receiving AC and ondansetron and dexamethasone for CINV prophylaxis.

5-year analysis of neoadjuvant pertuzumab and trastuzumab in patients with locally advanced, inflammatory, or early-stage HER2-positive breast cancer (NeoSphere): a multicentre, open-label, phase 2 randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: In the primary analysis of the NeoSphere trial, patients given neoadjuvant pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and docetaxel showed a significantly improved pathological complete response compared with those given trastuzumab and docetaxel after surgery. Here, we report 5-year progression-free survival, disease-free survival, and safety. METHODS: In this multicentre, open-label, phase 2 randomised trial in hospitals and medical clinics, treatment-naive adults with locally advanced, inflammatory, or early-stage HER2-positive breast cancer were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) to receive four neoadjuvant cycles of trastuzumab (8 mg/kg loading dose, followed by 6 mg/kg every 3 weeks) plus docetaxel (75 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks, increasing to 100 mg/m(2) from cycle 2 if tolerated; group A), pertuzumab (840 mg loading dose, followed by 420 mg every 3 weeks) and trastuzumab plus docetaxel (group B), pertuzumab and trastuzumab (group C), or pertuzumab and docetaxel (group D). After surgery, patients received three cycles of FEC (fluorouracil 600 mg/m(2), epirubicin 90 mg/m(2), and cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m(2)) every 3 weeks (patients in group C received four cycles of docetaxel prior to FEC), and trastuzumab 6 mg/kg every 3 weeks to complete 1 year's treatment (17 cycles in total). Randomisation was done by a central centre using dynamic allocation, stratified by operable, locally advanced, and inflammatory breast cancer, and by oestrogen and/or progesterone receptor positivity. Safety analyses were done according to treatment received. The primary endpoint (pathological complete response) was previously reported; secondary endpoints reported here are 5-year progression-free survival (analysed in the intention-to-treat population) and disease-free survival (analysed in patients who had surgery). Secondary and exploratory analyses were not powered for formal statistical hypothesis testing, and therefore results are for descriptive purposes only. The study ended on Sept 22, 2014 (last patient, last visit). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00545688. FINDINGS: Between Dec 17, 2007, and Dec 22, 2009, 417 eligible patients were randomly assigned to group A (107 patients), group B (107 patients), group C (107 patients), or group D (96 patients). One patient in group A withdrew before treatment. One patient assigned to group D received group A treatment, one patient assigned to group D received group B treatment, and one patient assigned to group B received group C treatment. At clinical cutoff, 87 patients had progressed or died. 5-year progression-free survival rates were 81% (95% CI 71-87) for group A, 86% (77-91) for group B, 73% (64-81) for group C, and 73% (63-81) for group D (hazard ratios 0·69 [95% CI 0·34-1·40] group B vs group A, 1·25 [0·68-2·30] group C vs group A, and 2·05 [1·07-3·93] group D vs group B). Disease-free survival results were consistent with progression-free survival results and were 81% (95% CI 72-88) for group A, 84% (72-91) for group B, 80% (70-86) for group C, and 75% (64-83) for group D. Patients who achieved total pathological complete response (all groups combined) had longer progression-free survival compared with patients who did not (85% [76-91] in patients who achieved total pathological response vs 76% [71-81] in patients who did not achieve total pathological response; hazard ratio 0·54 [95% CI 0·29-1·00]). There were no new or long-term safety concerns and tolerability was similar across groups (neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatment periods combined). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were neutropenia (group A: 71 [66%] of 107 patients; group B: 59 [55%] of 107; group C: 40 [37%] of 108; group D: 60 [64%] of 94), febrile neutropenia (group A: 10 [9%]; group B: 12 [11%]; group C: 5 [5%]; group D: 15 [16%]), and leucopenia (group A: 13 [12%]; group B: 6 [6%]; group C: 4 [4%]; group D: 8 [9%]). The number of patients with one or more serious adverse event was similar across groups (19-22 serious adverse events per group in 18-22% of patients). INTERPRETATION: Progression-free survival and disease-free survival at 5-year follow-up show large and overlapping CIs, but support the primary endpoint (pathological complete response) and suggest that neoadjuvant pertuzumab is beneficial when combined with trastuzumab and docetaxel. Additionally, they suggest that total pathological complete response could be an early indicator of long-term outcome in early-stage HER2-positive breast cancer. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Nilotinib versus imatinib as first-line therapy for patients with unresectable or metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumours (ENESTg1): a randomised phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Nilotinib inhibits the tyrosine kinase activity of ABL1/BCR-ABL1 and KIT, platelet-derived growth factor receptors (PDGFRs), and the discoidin domain receptor. Gain-of-function mutations in KIT or PDGFRα are key drivers in most gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GISTs). This trial was designed to test the efficacy and safety of nilotinib versus imatinib as first-line therapy for patients with advanced GISTs. METHODS: In this randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 3 trial (ENESTg1), participants from academic centres were aged 18 years or older and had previously untreated, histologically confirmed, metastatic or unresectable GISTs. Patients were stratified by previous adjuvant therapy and randomly assigned (1:1) via a randomisation list to receive oral imatinib 400 mg once daily or oral nilotinib 400 mg twice daily. The primary endpoint was centrally reviewed progression-free survival. Efficacy endpoints were assessed by intention-to-treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00785785. FINDINGS: Because the futility boundary was crossed at a preplanned interim analysis, trial accrual terminated in April, 2011. Between March 16, 2009, and April 21, 2011, 647 patients were enrolled; of whom 324 were allocated nilotinib and 320 were allocated imatinib. At final analysis of the core study (data cutoff, October, 2012), 2-year progression-free survival was higher in the imatinib group (59·2% [95% CI 50·9-66·5]) than in the nilotinib group (51·6% [43·0-59·5]; hazard ratio 1·47 [95% CI 1·10-1·95]). In the imatinib group, the most common grade 3-4 adverse events were hypophosphataemia (19 [6%]), anaemia (17 [5%]), abdominal pain (13; 4%), and elevated lipase level (15; 5%), and in the nilotinib group were anaemia (18; 6%), elevated lipase level (15; 5%), elevated alanine aminotransferase concentration (12; 4%), and abdominal pain (11; 3%). The most common serious adverse event in both groups was abdominal pain (11 [4%] in the imatinib group, 14 [4%] in the nilotinib group). INTERPRETATION: Nilotinib cannot be recommended for broad use to treat first-line GIST. However, future studies might identify patient subsets for whom first-line nilotinib could be of clinical benefit. FUNDING: Novartis Pharmaceuticals.

Intercalated combination of chemotherapy and erlotinib for patients with advanced stage non-small-cell lung cancer (FASTACT-2): a randomised, double-blind trial.

BACKGROUND: The results of FASTACT, a randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 2 study, showed that intercalated chemotherapy and erlotinib significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. We undertook FASTACT-2, a phase 3 study in a similar patient population. METHODS: In this phase 3 trial, patients with untreated stage IIIB/IV non-small-cell lung cancer were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio by use of an interactive internet response system with minimisation algorithm (stratified by disease stage, tumour histology, smoking status, and chemotherapy regimen) to receive six cycles of gemcitabine (1250 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8, intravenously) plus platinum (carboplatin 5 × area under the curve or cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) on day 1, intravenously) with intercalated erlotinib (150 mg/day on days 15-28, orally; chemotherapy plus erlotinib) or placebo orally (chemotherapy plus placebo) every 4 weeks. With the exception of an independent group responsible for monitoring data and safety monitoring board, everyone outside the interactive internet response system company was masked to treatment allocation. Patients continued to receive erlotinib or placebo until progression or unacceptable toxicity or death, and all patients in the placebo group were offered second-line erlotinib at the time of progression. The primary endpoint was PFS in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00883779. FINDINGS: From April 29, 2009, to Sept 9, 2010, 451 patients were randomly assigned to chemotherapy plus erlotinib (n=226) or chemotherapy plus placebo (n=225). PFS was significantly prolonged with chemotherapy plus erlotinib versus chemotherapy plus placebo (median PFS 7·6 months [95% CI 7·2-8·3], vs 6·0 months [5·6-7·1], hazard ratio [HR] 0·57 [0·47-0·69]; p<0·0001). Median overall survival for patients in the chemotherapy plus erlotinib and chemotherapy plus placebo groups was 18·3 months (16·3-20·8) and 15·2 months (12·7-17·5), respectively (HR 0·79 [0·64-0·99]; p=0·0420). Treatment benefit was noted only in patients with an activating EGFR gene mutation (median PFS 16·8 months [12·9-20·4] vs 6·9 months [5·3-7·6], HR 0·25 [0·16-0·39]; p<0·0001; median overall survival 31·4 months [22·2-undefined], vs 20·6 months [14·2-26·9], HR 0·48 [0·27-0·84]; p=0·0092). Serious adverse events were reported by 76 (34%) of 222 patients in the chemotherapy plus placebo group and 69 (31%) of 226 in the chemotherapy plus erlotinib group. The most common grade 3 or greater adverse events were neutropenia (65 [29%] patients and 55 [25%], respectively), thrombocytopenia (32 [14%] and 31 [14%], respectively), and anaemia (26 [12%] and 21 [9%], respectively). INTERPRETATION: Intercalated chemotherapy and erlotinib is a viable first-line option for patients with non-small-cell lung cancer with EGFR mutation-positive disease or selected patients with unknown EGFR mutation status. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Predictive value of Ki67 for adjuvant chemotherapy in node-negative, hormone receptor-positive breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Ki67 labeling index (Ki67 LI) is a measure of tumor proliferation. In breast cancer, evidence supporting its prognostic value is clear and its predictive value for response to treatment finds some benefits. However studies of Ki67 LI as a predictive marker in early breast cancer are still limited worldwide and there is no data in Thailand. OBJECTIVE: To assess the predictive value of Ki67 expression for adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with node-negative, hormone receptor-positive breast cancer MATERIAL AND METHOD: The authors retrospectively evaluated 127 diagnosed early breast cancer with node-negative, hormone receptor-positive patients and receiving adjuvant systemic treatment at Siriraj hospital. Disease free survival (DFS) was compared with the log-rank test according to Ki67 LI and adjuvant systemic treatment (chemoendocrine therapy and endocrine therapy alone). RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 3.3 years. The 5-year DFS rate was 79% for patients with low Ki67 expression and 75% for patients with high Ki67 expression. Of the 127 patients, 56 (44.1%) received chemoendocrine therapy and 71 (55.9%) were treated with endocrine therapy alone. There was no different effect of DFS among those receiving adjuvant endocrine therapy alone and those receiving adjuvant chemoendocrine therapy depending on Ki67 expression. CONCLUSION: Among patients with node-negative, hormone receptor-positive breast cancer, a high Ki67 LI had worse DFS trend than a low Ki67 LI but the Ki67 LI did not predict the efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy.

A phase II study of the combination of gemcitabine plus carboplatin as the neoadjuvant treatment in locally advanced breast cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Although anthracycline-based regimen is standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) for locally advanced breast cancer (LABC), there is some concern over its toxicities such as alopecia and cardiotoxicity. Gemcitabine is another active agent in metastatic breast cancer after failure to anthracycline with less toxicity. The objective of the present study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the combination of gemcitabine and carboplatin as NAC in LABC. MATERIAL AND METHOD: Patients with histologically confirmed LABC (T3, T4 or N2 and M0) were included. Patients were scheduled to receive 3 cycles of neoadjuvant GC (gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 D1, D8 and carboplatin AUC x 5 D1) every 21 days. Patients with clinical response underwent surgery and additional 3 cycles of adjuvant GC. Primary endpoint was clinical response rate whereas secondary endpoints included pathological response, DFS, OS and toxicity. RESULTS: Between 2004 and 2007, 40 LABC patients were enrolled. Of 40 patients, 35 were evaluable for efficacy and 40 for toxicity. Twenty-three out of 35 patients (65%) obtained cPR. Among 22 patients who had clinical response and who underwent surgery, overall pathological response rate was 51.5% with 1-pCR (2.9%) and 17-pPR (48.5%). All 7 triple-negative patients had pathological response (1-pCR, 6-pPR). At median follow-up of 59 months, median DFS and OS were not reached. Five-year OS and DFS were 67% and 62%, respectively Major adverse effect was myelosuppression without fatal complications. CONCLUSION: The combination GC was feasible and well-tolerated for LABC in neoadjuvant setting. Triple-negative subgroup seems to have high response to GC.

Efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant pertuzumab and trastuzumab in women with locally advanced, inflammatory, or early HER2-positive breast cancer (NeoSphere): a randomised multicentre, open-label, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Studies with pertuzumab, a novel anti-HER2 antibody, show improved efficacy when combined with the established HER2-directed antibody trastuzumab in breast cancer therapy. We investigated the combination of pertuzumab or trastuzumab, or both, with docetaxel and the combination of pertuzumab and trastuzumab without chemotherapy in the neoadjuvant setting. METHODS: In this multicentre, open-label, phase 2 study, treatment-naive women with HER2-positive breast cancer were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) centrally and stratified by operable, locally advanced, and inflammatory breast cancer, and by hormone receptor expression to receive four neoadjuvant cycles of: trastuzumab (8 mg/kg loading dose, followed by 6 mg/kg every 3 weeks) plus docetaxel (75 mg/m(2), escalating, if tolerated, to 100 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks; group A) or pertuzumab (loading dose 840 mg, followed by 420 mg every 3 weeks) and trastuzumab plus docetaxel (group B) or pertuzumab and trastuzumab (group C) or pertuzumab plus docetaxel (group D). The primary endpoint, examined in the intention-to-treat population, was pathological complete response in the breast. Neither patients nor investigators were masked to treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00545688. FINDINGS: Of 417 eligible patients, 107 were randomly assigned to group A, 107 to group B, 107 to group C, and 96 to group D. Patients given pertuzumab and trastuzumab plus docetaxel (group B) had a significantly improved pathological complete response rate (49 of 107 patients; 45·8% [95% CI 36·1-55·7]) compared with those given trastuzumab plus docetaxel (group A; 31 of 107; 29·0% [20·6-38·5]; p=0·0141). 23 of 96 (24·0% [15·8-33·7]) women given pertuzumab plus docetaxel (group D) had a pathological complete response, as did 18 of 107 (16·8% [10·3-25·3]) given pertuzumab and trastuzumab (group C). The most common adverse events of grade 3 or higher were neutropenia (61 of 107 women in group A, 48 of 107 in group B, one of 108 in group C, and 52 of 94 in group D), febrile neutropenia (eight, nine, none, and seven, respectively), and leucopenia (13, five, none, and seven, respectively). The number of serious adverse events was similar in groups A, B, and D (15-20 serious adverse events per group in 10-17% of patients) but lower in group C (four serious adverse events in 4% of patients). INTERPRETATION: Patients given pertuzumab and trastuzumab plus docetaxel (group B) had a significantly improved pathological complete response rate compared with those given trastuzumab plus docetaxel, without substantial differences in tolerability. Pertuzumab and trastuzumab without chemotherapy eradicated tumours in a proportion of women and showed a favourable safety profile. These findings justify further exploration in adjuvant trials and support the neoadjuvant approach for accelerating drug assessment in early breast cancer. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Cost-Utility and Budget Impact Analyses of Oral Chemotherapy for Stage III Colorectal Cancer: Real-World Evidence after Policy Implementation in Thailand.

This study conducted a cost-utility analysis and a budget impact analysis (BIA) of outpatient oral chemotherapy versus inpatient intravenous chemotherapy for stage III colorectal cancer (CRC) in Thailand. A Markov model was constructed to estimate the lifetime cost and health outcomes based on a societal perspective. Eight chemotherapy strategies were compared. Clinical and cost data on adjuvant chemotherapy were collected from the medical records of 1747 patients at Siriraj Hospital, Thailand. The cost-effectiveness results were interpreted against a Thai willingness-to-pay threshold of USD 5003/quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. A 5-year BIA was performed. Of the eight strategies, CAPOX then FOLFIRI yielded the highest life-year and QALY gains. Its total lifetime cost was also the highest. An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of CAPOX then FOLFIRI compared to 5FU/LV then FOLFOX, a commonly used regimen USD was 4258 per QALY gained.The BIA showed that when generic drug prices were applied, 5-FU/LV then FOLFOX had the smallest budgetary impact (USD 9.1 million). CAPOX then FOLFIRI required an approximately three times higher budgetary level (USD 25.1 million). CAPOX then FOLFIRI is the best option. It is cost-effective compared with 5-FU/LV then FOLFOX. However, policymakers should consider the relatively high budgetary burden of the CAPOX then FOLFIRI regimen.

Five-Year Outcomes With Pembrolizumab Versus Chemotherapy as First-Line Therapy in Patients With Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer and Programmed Death Ligand-1 Tumor Proportion Score ≥ 1% in the KEYNOTE-042 Study.

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported.We report 5-year results from the phase III KEYNOTE-042 study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02220894). Eligible patients with locally advanced/metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) without EGFR/ALK alterations and with programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) tumor proportion score (TPS) ≥ 1% received pembrolizumab 200 mg once every 3 weeks for 35 cycles or chemotherapy (carboplatin + paclitaxel or pemetrexed) for 4-6 cycles with optional maintenance pemetrexed. Primary end points were overall survival (OS) in PD-L1 TPS ≥ 50%, ≥ 20%, and ≥ 1% groups. Patients who completed 35 cycles of pembrolizumab with ≥ stable disease could begin second-course pembrolizumab upon progression. One thousand two hundred seventy-four patients were randomly assigned (pembrolizumab, n = 637; chemotherapy, n = 637). Median follow-up time was 61.1 (range, 50.0-76.3) months. OS outcomes favored pembrolizumab (v chemotherapy) regardless of PD-L1 TPS (hazard ratio [95% CI] for TPS ≥ 50%, 0.68 [0.57 to 0.81]; TPS ≥ 20%, 0.75 [0.64 to 0.87]; TPS ≥ 1%, 0.79 [0.70 to 0.89]), with estimated 5-year OS rates with pembrolizumab of 21.9%, 19.4%, and 16.6%, respectively. No new toxicities were identified. Objective response rate was 84.3% among 102 patients who completed 35 cycles of pembrolizumab and 15.2% among 33 patients who received second-course pembrolizumab. First-line pembrolizumab monotherapy continued to show durable clinical benefit versus chemotherapy after 5 years of follow-up in PD-L1-positive, locally advanced/metastatic NSCLC without EGFR/ALK alterations and remains a standard of care.

Randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial of ondansetron plus dexamethasone with or without metoclopramide as antiemetic prophylaxis in patients receiving high-dose cisplatin in medical practice.

PURPOSES: Ondansetron plus dexamethasone are standard antiemetic agents for highly emetogenic chemotherapy. Metoclopramide is a dopamine antagonist, which may enhance efficacy of ondansetron and dexamethasone. The objective of this study was to assess the efficacy and tolerability of metoclopramide added to standard antiemetic regimen for prophylaxis of cisplatin-induced emesis. METHODS: Patients who received ≥50 mg/m(2) of cisplatin for the first time were given intravenous ondansetron and dexamethasone on day 1 and were randomized to receive either standard antiemetics (ondansetron 8 mg orally bid on days 2-5 and dexamethasone 8 mg orally bid on days 2-4) plus metoclopramide 20 mg orally qid on days 2-5 or a placebo. The primary endpoint was a complete response (CR) rate defined as no emesis and no rescue treatment over a 120-h period. Secondary endpoints included severity of nausea and vomiting, time to first emesis, quality of life, and adverse effects. RESULTS: Among 162 patients, 50 patients (60%) in the metoclopramide group and 42 patients (53%) in the control group achieved CR (p = 0.36). The mean times to first emesis in the metoclopramide and control groups were 88 and 75 h, respectively (p = 0.18). The degrees of nausea and vomiting in both groups were similar. Eleven patients (13%) in the metoclopramide group and 20 (25%) in the control group required rescue treatment (p = 0.05). Quality of life and adverse effects were not different between the two groups. CONCLUSION: The addition of metoclopramide to ondansetron plus dexamethasone reduced the use of rescue medication, but did not affect complete response rate, quality of life or adverse effects.

C-reactive protein as a monitor of chemotherapy response in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (CML study).

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present prospective study was to evaluate the correlation between the change of serum c-reactive protein (CRP) levels and response to chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer. MATERIAL AND METHOD: Patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer who received the first line chemotherapy were measured serum CRP levels prior to treatment. Chemotherapy regimen was given to patients according to physicians and radiologic imaging was evaluated after two or three cycles of treatment. Serum CRP levels were measured first time at pre-treatment and second time in patients who had pre-treatment serum CRP levels greater than normal range (3 mg/l) at the time of response assessment or clinical progression. The primary endpoint was the correlation between change of serum CRP levels and radiologic response. The secondary endpoint was the prevalence of elevated CRP levels in advanced NSCLC patients and correlation between initial CRP levels and progression free survival (PFS). RESULTS: Fifty four patients were enrolled. Prevalence of elevated CRP levels in advanced NSCLC was 76%. Thirty patients had serial serum CRP measured. There was correlation between change in serum CRP levels and response to treatment (r = 0.43, p = 0.018, spearman rank). There was significant correlation between response to treatment and decrease in CRP levels greater than 50% (p = 0.009, Fisher's exact test). In contrast there was no correlation between progression and increase in CRP levels (p = 0.640, Fisher's exact test). All patients with serial CRP levels decreased to normal range (< 3 mg/ l) had response to chemotherapy. High pre-treatment CRP levels (> 100 mg/l) correlated with poor PFS. Median PFS for patients with pre-treatment CRP levels of 3-30 mg/l, 30-100 mg/l and >100 mg/l was 23.0 weeks, 13.0 weeks and 6.3 weeks, respectively. Patients with serial CRP levels less than 3 mg/l had greater PFS than patients with serial CRP levels higher than 3 mg/l (p = 0.026, log rank test). CONCLUSION: The present study suggested that high levels of pre-treatment serum CRP and persistent CRP in serum was a poor prognostic factor. The decrease in CRP levels greater than 50% was a simple method to predict the response to treatment in patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small lung cancer.

Autoantibody profiles and clinical association in Thai patients with autoimmune retinopathy.

Autoimmune retinopathy (AIR) is a rare immune-mediated inflammation of the retina. The autoantibodies against retinal proteins and glycolytic enzymes were reported to be involved in the pathogenesis. This retrospective cohort study assessed the antiretinal autoantibody profiles and their association with clinical outcomes of AIR patients in Thailand. We included 44 patients, 75% were females, with the overall median age of onset of 48 (17-74, IQR 40-55.5) years. Common clinical presentations were nyctalopia (65.9%), blurred vision (52.3%), constricted visual field (43.2%), and nonrecordable electroretinography (65.9%). Underlying malignancy and autoimmune diseases were found in 2 and 12 female patients, respectively. We found 41 autoantibodies, with anti-α-enolase (65.9%) showing the highest prevalence, followed by anti-CAII (43.2%), anti-aldolase (40.9%), and anti-GAPDH (36.4%). Anti-aldolase was associated with male gender (P = 0.012, OR 7.11, 95% CI 1.54-32.91). Anti-CAII showed significant association with age of onset (P = 0.025, 95% CI - 17.28 to - 1.24), while anti-α-enolase (P = 0.002, OR 4.37, 95% CI 1.83-10.37) and anti-GAPDH (P = 0.001, OR 1.87, 95% CI 1.32-2.64) were significantly associated with nonrecordable electroretinography. Association between the antibody profiles and clinical outcomes may be used to direct and adjust the treatment plans and provide insights in the pathogenesis of AIR.

Cancer anemia survey in Division of Medical Oncology at Siriraj Hospital (CAS).

BACKGROUND: Causes of anemia in cancer patients are multifaceted and include such factors as nutritional deficiency anemia, anemia of malignancy and treatment-related anemia. Chemotherapy, especially a platinum-based regimen, is well recognized to cause anemia. Anemia results in decrease of functional capacity, lower performance status, poor compliance and adverse prognosis. Optimal management of anemia in cancer patients is an essential component of cancer treatment. Previously, there was no information about this condition available in Thailand. OBJECTIVE: 1) To evaluate frequency, characteristics of anemia and treatments of anemia in our cancer patients who received chemotherapy treatment. 2) To identify the factors that influence hemoglobin (Hb) level in cancer patients especially chemotherapy regimens. MATERIAL AND METHOD: Patients with diagnosis of solid malignancy who were scheduled to receive chemotherapy for least 4 cycles between June 2006 and December 2007 were included. All enrolled patients' data which included demographics, types and stages of cancer, chemotherapy regimen, Hb at baseline, Hb level before each cycle of chemotherapy and treatment of anemia, were recorded. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Patients' data were presented in terms of percent, mean or median. Logistic-regression analysis was performed to identify risk factors of anemia in cancer patients. RESULTS: Three-hundred and four patients were enrolled, 233 patients were female and 71 were male. The age of patients varied from 15 to 86 years old. Median age was 52 years old. Hb level at enrollment ranged from 7.7 to 16.1 g/dl, mean baseline Hb was 12.5 g/dl. Incidence of anemia at baseline was 34.5 percent whereas the incidence increased to 61.1 percent after receiving chemotherapy. The incidence of anemia in all patients was not significantly different from that of a subgroup of patients with normal baseline Hb. The patients who received platinum and anthracycline-based chemotherapy developed more anemia than those who received other chemotherapy regimens, with odd ratios of 9.4 (95% CI; 3.1-28.9, p < 0.001) and 3.5 (95% CI; 1.4-8.5, p = 0.005), respectively. Most anemic patients were asymptomatic; twenty-one out of 214 anemic patients (9.8%) received specific treatment for anemia. CONCLUSION: Chemotherapy-induced anemia is a common problem found in cancer patients, especially in those receiving platinum-based chemotherapy Most of the anemic patients had asymptomatic grade I and II anemia. Blood transfusion was the treatment of choice for severe, symptomatic anemia in our hospital.

Efficacy and tolerability of BP-C1 in metastatic breast cancer: a Phase II, randomized, double-blind, and placebo-controlled Thai multi-center study.

AIMS: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of BP-C1 vs equal-looking placebo in metastatic breast cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled multi-center study with a semicross-over design was performed. Sixteen patients received daily intramuscular injection of 0.035 mg/kg bodyweight of BP-C1 and 15 patients received equal-looking placebo for 32 days. After 32 days, the placebo patients crossed to BP-C1 with the last observation in the placebo period as baseline. The status of receptors including estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PtR), and human EGF receptor 2 (HER2) was analyzed prior to inclusion in the study. Thoracoabdominal CT scan was blindly analyzed by the same independent radiologist in accordance with the RECIST criteria 1.1. Toxicity was assessed according to the NCI Bethesda Version 2.0 (CTC-NCI), and the quality of life (QOL) was assessed according to European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer QOL-C30 and QOL-BR23. RESULTS: The sum of target lesion diameters (sum lesions) after 32 days of treatment increased by 8.9% (P=0.08) in the BP-C1 arm compared to 37.6% (P<0.001) in placebo patients. Twelve of the 15 placebo patients subsequently had BP-C1 treatment. The increase in sum lesions was 3.5% in these patients. The sum of CTC-NCI was increased 18.7% in the BP-C1 arm (P=0.38) compared to 50.9% (P=0.04) in placebo patients. Four mild/moderate adverse events (AEs) present in BP-C1. Two mild/moderate AEs and one severe AE present in placebo. The QOL benchmarks "breast cancer problems last week", "sexual interest and activity last 4 weeks", and "breast cancer-related pain and discomfort last week" were stable in the BP-C1 arm but deteriorated in placebo patients. The sum lesions increased significantly in ER+ (P=0.02) and PtR+ (P=0.03) but not in HER2+. The increase in sum lesions significantly decreased (P=0.02) with an increasing number of negative receptors. CONCLUSION: A total of 32 days of BP-C1 treatment inhibited cancer growth and was well tolerated with few and mainly mild AEs. The efficacy of BP-C1 was superior in receptor-negative patients. CLINICALTRIALSGOV IDENTIFIER: NCT03603197.

Aflibercept Plus FOLFIRI for Second-line Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Observations from the Global Aflibercept Safety and Health-Related Quality-of-Life Program (ASQoP).

BACKGROUND: The objectives of this study were to evaluate the safety profile of aflibercept and health-related quality of life (HRQL) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) provided with aflibercept access before marketing authorization. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients received aflibercept followed by FOLFIRI (fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan) on day 1 of a 2-week cycle until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, death, or patient/investigator decision to discontinue. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were evaluated, and HRQL was assessed at baseline, cycle 3, and every other cycle using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30, EORTC QLQ-CR29, and EuroQol 5-Dimensions 3-Levels questionnaires (NCT01571284). RESULTS: Overall, 779 adult patients with mCRC, who received ≥ 1 prior oxaliplatin-based regimen and had disease progression during or following their last administration of oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy, were enrolled. At data cutoff, all patients had discontinued treatment, mainly owing to disease progression (51.7%). The most common TEAEs of any grade were diarrhea (61.6%), hypertension (48.4%), and nausea (43.3%). The most common grade 3/4 TEAEs were hypertension (24.1%), neutropenia (23.1%), and diarrhea (15.3%). Clinically meaningful changes in HRQL were reported for all measures. Most patients either had an improvement in their HRQL scores or remained stable during the treatment period based on patient-reported outcomes. CONCLUSION: The data from this study support the tolerability of the combination of aflibercept and FOLFIRI in a setting that more closely approximates real life in patients with mCRC who failed to respond to oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy, and also suggest an improvement in HRQL.

Real-life clinical pattern, management, and survival in Thai patients with early-stage or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To characterize the clinical pattern and evaluate real-life practices in the management of patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) in Thailand. METHODS: In this multicenter, prospective, observational cohort, females (aged ≥18 years) with histologically and immunohistochemically confirmed TNBC were enrolled. Patient data was collected at four study visits-an inclusion visit (for enrollment), and three subsequent follow-up visits at 12±1, 24±1, and 36±1 months after completion of first day of any planned chemotherapy. RESULTS: Of the 293 enrolled patients, 262 (89.4%) had early-stage TNBC (Stage I: 46 patients, Stage II: 151 patients, and Stage III: 65 patients) and 31 (10.6%) had metastatic TNBC (mTNBC). Chemotherapy was prescribed to 95.4% of the early-stage patients and to 100.0% of the mTNBC patients; most commonly as anthracycline-based in combination with cyclophosphamide and other agents. Patients' performance status and consensus guidelines were the major factors affecting choice of treatment. In early-stage patients, median disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) had not been reached for Stage I and II patients, and were calculated to be 37.0 months and 40.0 months, respectively, in Stage III patients. In mTNBC patients, progression-free survival (PFS) and OS were found to be 10.0 months and 14.0 months, respectively. In Stage III patients, anthracycline-based regimens were found to be associated with increase in DFS (p = 0.0181) and OS (p = 0.0027) compared to non-anthracycline-based regimens. In mTNBC patients, non-taxane-based regimens were associated with an increase in PFS (p = 0.0025). The 3-year survival rates in early-stage and mTNBC patients were 85.0% and 21.0%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Clinical management of TNBC in Thailand follows the general guidelines for treatment of TNBC. However, prognosis and survival outcomes are suboptimal, especially in progressive disease. This study is the first assessment in the existing practices in which the results could pave to way to improve the treatment outcome of TNBC in Thailand.

Everolimus Plus Endocrine Therapy for Postmenopausal Women With Estrogen Receptor-Positive, Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Negative Advanced Breast Cancer: A Clinical Trial.

Importance: Cotargeting the mammalian target of rapamycin pathway and estrogen receptor may prevent or delay endocrine resistance in patients receiving first-line treatment for advanced breast cancer. Objective: To investigate the combination of everolimus plus endocrine therapy in first-line and second-line treatment settings for postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor-positive, human epidermal growth receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: In the multicenter, open-label, single-arm, phase 2 BOLERO-4 (Breast Cancer Trials of Oral Everolimus) clinical trial, 245 patients were screened for eligibility; 202 were enrolled between March 7, 2013, and December 17, 2014. A median follow-up of 29.5 months had been achieved by the data cutoff date (December 17, 2016). Interventions: Patients received first-line treatment with everolimus, 10 mg/d, plus letrozole, 2.5 mg/d. Second-line treatment with everolimus, 10 mg/d, plus exemestane, 25 mg/d, was offered at the investigator's discretion upon initial disease progression. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival in the first-line setting per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.0. Safety was assessed in patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication and at least 1 postbaseline safety assessment. Results: A total of 202 women treated in the first-line setting had a median age of 64.0 years (interquartile range, 58.0-70.0 years) with metastatic (194 [96.0%]) or locally advanced (8 [4.0%]) breast cancer. Median progression-free survival was 22.0 months (95% CI, 18.1-25.1 months) with everolimus and letrozole. Median overall survival was not reached; 24-month estimated overall survival rate was 78.7% (95% CI, 72.1%-83.9%). Fifty patients started second-line treatment; median progression-free survival was 3.7 months (95% CI, 1.9-7.4 months). No new safety signals were observed. In the first-line setting, the most common all-grade adverse event was stomatitis (139 [68.8%]); the most common grade 3 to 4 adverse event was anemia (21 [10.4%]). In the second-line setting, the most common adverse events were stomatitis and decreased weight (10 [20.0%] each); the most common grade 3 to 4 adverse event was hypertension (5 [10.0%]). There were 50 (24.8%) deaths overall during the study; 40 were due to study indication (breast cancer). Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this trial add to the existing body of evidence suggesting that everolimus plus endocrine therapy is a good first-line treatment option for postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01698918.

Clinical utility of a blood-based EGFR mutation test in patients receiving first-line erlotinib therapy in the ENSURE, FASTACT-2, and ASPIRATION studies.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with an adenocarcinoma component are recommended to undergo epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation testing when being considered for EGFR targeted therapy. We conducted an exploratory analysis to inform the clinical utility of EGFR mutation testing in blood cell-free DNA using the cobas®EGFR Mutation Test v2. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two EGFR mutation tests, a tissue-based assay (cobas® v1) and a tissue- and blood-based assay (cobas® v2) were used to analyze matched biopsy and blood samples (897 paired samples) from three Asian studies of first-line erlotinib with similar intent-to-treat populations. ENSURE was a phase III comparison of erlotinib and gemcitabine/platinum, FASTACT-2 was a phase III study of gemcitabine/platinum plus erlotinib or placebo, and ASPIRATION was a single-arm phase II study of erlotinib. Agreement statistics were evaluated, based on sensitivity and specificity between the two assays in subgroups of patients with increasing tumor burden. RESULTS: Patients with discordant EGFR (tissue+/plasma-) mutation status achieved longer progression-free and overall survival than those with concordant (tissue+/plasma+) mutation status. Tumor burden was significantly greater in patients with concordant versus discordant mutations. Pooled analyses of data from the three studies showed a sensitivity of 72.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] 67.8-76.1) and a specificity of 97.9% (95% CI 96.0-99.0) for blood-based testing; sensitivity was greatest in patients with larger baseline tumors. CONCLUSIONS: Blood-based EGFR mutation testing demonstrated high specificity and good sensitivity, and offers a convenient and easily accessible diagnostic method to complement tissue-based tests. Patients with a discordant mutation status in plasma and tissue, had improved survival outcomes compared with those with a concordant mutation status, which may be due to their lower tumor burden. These data help to inform the clinical utility of this blood-based assay for the detection of EGFR mutations.

Efficacy, Tolerability, and Biomarker Analyses of Once-Every-2-Weeks Cetuximab Plus First-Line FOLFOX or FOLFIRI in Patients With KRAS or All RAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: The Phase 2 APEC Study.

BACKGROUND: In patients with KRAS wild-type (wt) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), outcomes with first-line chemotherapies are improved by adding weekly cetuximab. The APEC study investigated first-line once-every-2-weeks cetuximab plus chemotherapy for patients with KRAS wt mCRC; additional biomarker subgroups were also analyzed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: APEC was a nonrandomized phase 2 trial conducted in the Asia-Pacific region. Patients (n = 289) received once-every-2-weeks cetuximab with investigator's choice of chemotherapy (FOLFOX or FOLFIRI). The primary end point was best confirmed overall response rate (BORR); progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were secondary end points. Early tumor shrinkage (ETS) and depth of response (DpR) were also evaluated. RESULTS: In the KRAS wt population, BORR was 58.8%, median PFS 11.1 months, and median OS 26.8 months. Expanded RAS mutational analysis revealed that patients with RAS wt mCRC had better outcomes (BORR = 64.7%; median PFS = 13.0 months; median OS = 28.4 months). The data suggest that ETS and DpR may be associated with survival outcomes in the RAS wt population. Although this study was not designed to formally assess differences in outcome between treatment subgroups, efficacy results appeared similar for patients treated with FOLFOX and FOLFIRI. There were no new safety findings; in particular, grade 3/4 skin reactions were within clinical expectations. CONCLUSION: The observed activity and safety profile is similar to that reported in prior first-line pivotal studies involving weekly cetuximab, suggesting once-every-2-weeks cetuximab is effective and tolerable as first-line therapy and may represent an alternative to weekly administration.