Single-agent erlotinib versus oral etoposide in patients with recurrent or refractory pediatric ependymoma: a randomized open-label study.

Overexpression of human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER/EGFR) is associated with various tumors, including ependymomas. To investigate whether EGFR inhibition was of benefit in pediatric patients with recurrent ependymoma, a multi-center, randomized, open-label, phase 2 study of oral erlotinib versus oral etoposide was undertaken. Twenty-five patients were randomized to receive erlotinib 85 mg/m(2) daily or etoposide 50 mg/m(2)/day for 21 consecutive days followed by a 7-day rest period. Courses were repeated every 28 days. In the erlotinib arm, no patient achieved a complete, partial, or minor response, and only 2 (15.4 %) patients showed stable disease as their best response. In the etoposide arm, 2 patients (16.7 %) demonstrated partial responses, 1 (8.3 %) patient demonstrated a minor response, and 2 (16.7 %) showed prolonged stable disease, for a prolonged disease control rate of 41.7 %. Three patients received at least nine cycles of etoposide (range 9-24 cycles) before discontinuing at the request of the physician and/or family. Four patients who failed etoposide in this study received erlotinib in a companion single arm study; none had a response. The futility criteria were met at the second interim analysis, and both studies were discontinued. Pharmacokinetics of erlotinib were similar to previous observations in pediatric patients. Overall, erlotinib was well tolerated and safety was consistent with its established profile in adults. The overall risk-benefit profile does not support the use of erlotinib in pediatric patients with recurrent ependymoma, whereas single-agent etoposide appears to have efficacy in a subset of patients.

Adjuvant Erlotinib Versus Placebo in Patients With Stage IB-IIIA Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer (RADIANT): A Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase III Trial.

PURPOSE: Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) -tyrosine kinase inhibitors have proven efficacy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We hypothesized that erlotinib would be efficacious in the adjuvant setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: An international randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was conducted in patients with completely resected IB to IIIA NSCLC whose tumors expressed EGFR protein by immunohistochemistry or EGFR amplification by fluorescence in situ hybridization. Patients were assigned 2:1 to erlotinib 150 mg once per day or placebo for 2 years. Stratification factors were stage, histology, previous adjuvant chemotherapy, smoking status, EGFR amplification status, and country. The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS); key secondary end points were overall survival (OS) and DFS and OS in patients whose tumors had EGFR-activating mutations (EGFRm-positive). RESULTS: A total of 973 patients were randomly assigned (November 26, 2007, to July 7, 2010). There was no statistically significant difference in DFS (median, 50.5 months for erlotinib and 48.2 months for placebo; hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.10; P = .324). Among the 161 patients (16.5%) in the EGFRm-positive subgroup, DFS favored erlotinib (median, 46.4 v 28.5 months; hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.98; P = .039), but this was not statistically significant because of the hierarchical testing procedure. OS data are immature. Rash and diarrhea were common adverse events occurring in 528 (86.4%) and 319 (52.2%) patients treated with erlotinib, respectively, versus 110 (32.1%) and 54 (15.7%) patients receiving placebo. The most common grade 3 adverse events in patients treated with erlotinib were rash (22.3%) and diarrhea (6.2%). CONCLUSION: Adjuvant erlotinib did not prolong DFS in patients with EGFR-expressing NSCLC or in the EGFRm-positive subgroup. Further evaluation of erlotinib is warranted in the EGFRm-positive subgroup.

Safety of enzalutamide in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer previously treated with docetaxel: expanded access in North America.

BACKGROUND: The open-label, single-arm enzalutamide expanded access program (EAP) in the United States and Canada evaluated the safety of enzalutamide in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) who had previously received docetaxel. METHODS: Patients (n = 507) received enzalutamide 160 mg/day until disease progression, intolerable adverse events (AEs), or commercial availability occurred. AEs and other safety variables were assessed on day 1, weeks 4 and 12, and every 12 weeks thereafter. Data following transition to commercial drug were not collected. RESULTS: Median age was 71 years (range 43-97); 426 patients (83.9%) had a baseline ECOG score of ≤1. In addition to docetaxel, the majority of patients had received prior prostate cancer treatments such as abiraterone (76.1%) or cabazitaxel (28.6%). Median study treatment duration was 2.6 months (range 0.03-9.07). The most frequently reported reasons for discontinuation were commercial availability of enzalutamide (46.7%) and progressive disease (33.7%). A total of 88.2% of patients experienced AEs; 45.4% experienced AEs with a maximum grade of 1 or 2. Fatigue (39.1%), nausea (22.7%), and anorexia (14.8%) were the most commonly reported AEs. Seizure was reported in four patients (0.8%). The most commonly reported event leading to death was progression of metastatic prostate cancer (7.7%). CONCLUSION: In this heavily pretreated EAP population with progressive mCRPC, enzalutamide was well tolerated and the safety profile was consistent with that of the AFFIRM trial.