ENZA-p trial protocol: a randomized phase II trial using prostate-specific membrane antigen as a therapeutic target and prognostic indicator in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer treated with enzalutamide (ANZUP 1901).

OBJECTIVES: To determine the activity and safety of lutetium-177 (177 Lu)-prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-617 in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) commencing enzalutamide, who are at high risk of early progression, and to identify potential prognostic and predictive biomarkers from imaging, blood and tissue. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: ENZA-p (ANZUP 1901) is an open-label, randomized, two-arm, multicentre, phase 2 trial. Participants are randomly assigned (1:1) to treatment with enzalutamide 160 mg daily alone or enzalutamide plus 177 Lu-PSMA-617 7.5 GBq on Days 15 and 57. Two additional 177 Lu-PSMA-617 doses are allowed, informed by Day-92 Gallium-68 (68 Ga)-PSMA positron emission tomography (PET; up to four doses in total). The primary endpoint is prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression-free survival (PFS). Other major endpoints include radiological PFS, PSA response rate, overall survival, health-related quality of life, adverse events and cost-effectiveness. Key eligibility criteria include: biochemical and/or clinical progression; 68 Ga-PSMA PET-avid disease; no prior androgen signalling inhibitor, excepting abiraterone; no prior chemotherapy for mCRPC; and ≥2 high-risk features for early enzalutamide failure. Assessments are 4 weekly during study treatment, then 6 weekly until radiographic progression. Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) are used to assess imaging conducted every 12 weeks, 68 Ga-PSMA PET at baseline, Days 15 and 92, and at progression, and 18 F-fluorine deoxyglucose (18 F-FDG) PET at baseline and progression. Translational samples include blood (and optional biopsies) at baseline, Day 92, and first progression. Correlative studies include identification of prognostic and predictive biomarkers from 68 Ga-PSMA and 18 F-FDG PET/CT, circulating tumour cells and circulating tumour DNA. The trial will enrol 160 participants, providing 80% power with a two-sided type-1 error rate of 5% to detect a hazard ratio of 0.625 assuming a median PSA-PFS of 5 months with enzalutamide alone. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: The combination of 177 Lu-PSMA-617 and enzalutamide may be synergistic. ENZA-p will determine the safety and efficacy of the combination in addition to developing predictive and prognostic biomarkers to better guide treatment decisions.

The AGITG GAP Study: A Phase II Study of Perioperative Gemcitabine and Nab-Paclitaxel for Resectable Pancreas Cancer.

BACKGROUND: While combination therapy with nab-paclitaxel/gemcitabine (nab-gem) is effective in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), its efficacy as perioperative chemotherapy is unknown. The primary objective of this multicenter, prospective, single-arm, phase II study was to determine whether neoadjuvant therapy with nab-gem was associated with higher complete resection rates (R0) in resectable PDAC, while the secondary objectives were to determine the utility of radiological assessment of response to preoperative chemotherapy and the safety and efficacy of nab-gem as perioperative therapy. METHODS: Patients were recruited from eight Australian sites, and 42 patients with radiologically defined resectable PDAC and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 were enrolled. Participants received two cycles of preoperative nab-paclitaxel 125 mg/m2 and gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 (28-day cycle) presurgery, and four cycles postoperatively. Early response to chemotherapy was measured with fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) scans on day 15. RESULTS: Preoperative nab-gem was completed by 93% of participants, but only 63% postoperatively. Thirty-six patients had surgery: 6 (17%) were unresectable, 15 (52%) had R0 (≥ 1 mm) resections, 14 (48%) had R1 (< 1 mm) resections, and 1 patient did not have PDAC. Median progression-free survival was 12.3 months and median overall survival (OS) was 23.5 months: R0 patients had an OS of 35 months versus 25.6 months for R1 patients after surgery. Seven patients had not progressed after 43 months. CONCLUSIONS: The GAP trial demonstrated that perioperative nab-gem was tolerable. Although the primary endpoint of an 85% R0 rate was not met, the R0 rate was similar to trials using a > 1 mm R0 resection definition, and survival rates were comparable with recent adjuvant studies.

Addition of cetuximab to oxaliplatin-based first-line combination chemotherapy for treatment of advanced colorectal cancer: results of the randomised phase 3 MRC COIN trial.

BACKGROUND: In the Medical Research Council (MRC) COIN trial, the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-targeted antibody cetuximab was added to standard chemotherapy in first-line treatment of advanced colorectal cancer with the aim of assessing effect on overall survival. METHODS: In this randomised controlled trial, patients who were fit for but had not received previous chemotherapy for advanced colorectal cancer were randomly assigned to oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy (arm A), the same combination plus cetuximab (arm B), or intermittent chemotherapy (arm C). The choice of fluoropyrimidine therapy (capecitabine or infused fluouroracil plus leucovorin) was decided before randomisation. Randomisation was done centrally (via telephone) by the MRC Clinical Trials Unit using minimisation. Treatment allocation was not masked. The comparison of arms A and C is described in a companion paper. Here, we present the comparison of arm A and B, for which the primary outcome was overall survival in patients with KRAS wild-type tumours. Analysis was by intention to treat. Further analyses with respect to NRAS, BRAF, and EGFR status were done. The trial is registered, ISRCTN27286448. FINDINGS: 1630 patients were randomly assigned to treatment groups (815 to standard therapy and 815 to addition of cetuximab). Tumour samples from 1316 (81%) patients were used for somatic molecular analyses; 565 (43%) had KRAS mutations. In patients with KRAS wild-type tumours (arm A, n=367; arm B, n=362), overall survival did not differ between treatment groups (median survival 17·9 months [IQR 10·3-29·2] in the control group vs 17·0 months [9·4-30·1] in the cetuximab group; HR 1·04, 95% CI 0·87-1·23, p=0·67). Similarly, there was no effect on progression-free survival (8·6 months [IQR 5·0-12·5] in the control group vs 8·6 months [5·1-13·8] in the cetuximab group; HR 0·96, 0·82-1·12, p=0·60). Overall response rate increased from 57% (n=209) with chemotherapy alone to 64% (n=232) with addition of cetuximab (p=0·049). Grade 3 and higher skin and gastrointestinal toxic effects were increased with cetuximab (14 vs 114 and 67 vs 97 patients in the control group vs the cetuximab group with KRAS wild-type tumours, respectively). Overall survival differs by somatic mutation status irrespective of treatment received: BRAF mutant, 8·8 months (IQR 4·5-27·4); KRAS mutant, 14·4 months (8·5-24·0); all wild-type, 20·1 months (11·5-31·7). INTERPRETATION: This trial has not confirmed a benefit of addition of cetuximab to oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy in first-line treatment of patients with advanced colorectal cancer. Cetuximab increases response rate, with no evidence of benefit in progression-free or overall survival in KRAS wild-type patients or even in patients selected by additional mutational analysis of their tumours. The use of cetuximab in combination with oxaliplatin and capecitabine in first-line chemotherapy in patients with widespread metastases cannot be recommended. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, Cancer Research Wales, UK Medical Research Council, Merck KGgA.

Adolescents with attitude ... changes in views about smoking over time.

ISSUE ADDRESSED: Adolescents who experiment with smoking often develop into long-term, dependent smokers. Appropriate youth smoking prevention strategies require an understanding of the predictors of smoking (e.g. attitudes and beliefs) and the amenability of these to change over time. METHOD: A secondary analysis of 'Smarter than Smoking' evaluation data from a series of cross-sectional surveys conducted over six years (1999-2005). The study sample comprised 683, 14-15 year-old Western Australians residing across Perth. Basic descriptive statistics were calculated, accompanied by main effects logistic regression. RESULTS: Significant changes were observed between 1999 and 2005 in key attitudes and beliefs relating to smoking, with a strengthening in agreement with statements relating to the smell, cost and effects on fitness. For several attitudes and beliefs however, no change or a weakening of agreement was observed over time. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, this study found support for a strengthening in smoking-related attitudes and beliefs over the six year period (1999 to 2005). A number of the attitudinal and belief changes corresponded to messages targeted by Smarter than Smoking's communication objectives and media strategies. Attitudes and beliefs that did not change significantly over time were more likely to relate to consequences of smoking not directly targeted by the project.