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.

Pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and docetaxel in HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: In patients with metastatic breast cancer that is positive for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), progression-free survival was significantly improved after first-line therapy with pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and docetaxel, as compared with placebo, trastuzumab, and docetaxel. Overall survival was significantly improved with pertuzumab in an interim analysis without the median being reached. We report final prespecified overall survival results with a median follow-up of 50 months. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with metastatic breast cancer who had not received previous chemotherapy or anti-HER2 therapy for their metastatic disease to receive the pertuzumab combination or the placebo combination. The secondary end points of overall survival, investigator-assessed progression-free survival, independently assessed duration of response, and safety are reported. Sensitivity analyses were adjusted for patients who crossed over from placebo to pertuzumab after the interim analysis. RESULTS: The median overall survival was 56.5 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 49.3 to not reached) in the group receiving the pertuzumab combination, as compared with 40.8 months (95% CI, 35.8 to 48.3) in the group receiving the placebo combination (hazard ratio favoring the pertuzumab group, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.84; P<0.001), a difference of 15.7 months. This analysis was not adjusted for crossover to the pertuzumab group and is therefore conservative. Results of sensitivity analyses after adjustment for crossover were consistent. Median progression-free survival as assessed by investigators improved by 6.3 months in the pertuzumab group (hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.80). Pertuzumab extended the median duration of response by 7.7 months, as independently assessed. Most adverse events occurred during the administration of docetaxel in the two groups, with long-term cardiac safety maintained. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer, the addition of pertuzumab to trastuzumab and docetaxel, as compared with the addition of placebo, significantly improved the median overall survival to 56.5 months and extended the results of previous analyses showing the efficacy of this drug combination. (Funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche and Genentech; CLEOPATRA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00567190.).

Biomarker analyses in CLEOPATRA: a phase III, placebo-controlled study of pertuzumab in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive, first-line metastatic breast cancer.

PURPOSE: To explore the prognostic and/or predictive value of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) pathway-related biomarkers in the phase III CLEOPATRA study of pertuzumab plus trastuzumab plus docetaxel versus placebo plus trastuzumab plus docetaxel as first-line treatment for patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Mandatory tumor and serum samples were collected (N = 808; 58% to 99.8% were assessable), and amphiregulin, betacellulin, epidermal growth factor (EGF), transforming growth factor alpha, EGF receptor, HER2, HER3, insulin-like growth factor 1 receptor, PTEN, phosphorylated AKT, PIK3CA, CMYC, serum HER2 extracellular domain (sHER2), and FCγR were assessed using appropriate assays. Two types of correlations were investigated using univariable Cox regression: predictive effects (qualitative association of biomarkers with pertuzumab progression-free survival [PFS] benefit) and prognostic effects independent of treatment arm (relationship of each biomarker to clinical outcome in both arms pooled). RESULTS: Pertuzumab consistently showed a PFS benefit, independent of biomarker subgroups (hazard ratio < 1.0), including estrogen receptor-negative and -positive subgroups. High HER2 protein, high HER2 and HER3 mRNA levels, wild-type PIK3CA, and low sHER2 showed a significantly better prognosis (P < .05). PIK3CA showed the greatest prognostic effect, with longer median PFS for patients whose tumors expressed wild-type versus mutated PIK3CA in both the control (13.8 v 8.6 months) and pertuzumab groups (21.8 v 12.5 months). CONCLUSION: Through comprehensive prospective analyses, CLEOPATRA biomarker data demonstrate that HER2 is the only marker suited for patient selection for the trastuzumab plus pertuzumab-based regimen in HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer. HER2, HER3, and PIK3CA were relevant prognostic factors.

Population pharmacokinetic and covariate analysis of pertuzumab, a HER2-targeted monoclonal antibody, and evaluation of a fixed, non-weight-based dose in patients with a variety of solid tumors.

PURPOSE: To characterize the population pharmacokinetics (PK) of pertuzumab across clinical trials in a variety of solid tumors, evaluate the potential impact of patient characteristics on PK, and confirm the appropriateness of the fixed (non-weight-based) dose. METHODS: Pertuzumab concentration data collected following intravenous administration during eleven phase I/II studies and the pivotal phase III trial CLEOPATRA were analyzed using nonlinear mixed-effects modeling. The potential impact of patient and laboratory characteristics and HER2 target-related variables on pertuzumab PK were investigated in a covariate analysis. The final model was used to confirm selection of fixed, non-weight-based dosing of pertuzumab, and to compare pertuzumab PK in CLEOPATRA with the other studies. RESULTS: The analysis included 4,525 serum concentration measurements from 481 patients with solid tumors. Pertuzumab PK in the 2-25 mg/kg dose range was described by a two-compartment linear model with first-order elimination. The elimination clearance and central compartment volume were 0.235 L/day, and 3.11 L, respectively, and the terminal elimination half-life was 18.0 days. Baseline serum albumin and lean body weight had statistically significant effects on pertuzumab clearance; however, simulations showed that the magnitude of their effects on pertuzumab exposure was minimal compared with overall variability and was not clinically relevant. Thus, variations in these factors do not require dose adjustments. CONCLUSIONS: The fixed, non-weight-based dosing of pertuzumab, 840 mg loading dose followed by a 420 mg maintenance dose every 3 weeks, in patients with the solid tumors in this analysis is well supported by the population pharmacokinetic modeling and simulation results.

Evaluating the predictive value of biomarkers for efficacy outcomes in response to pertuzumab- and trastuzumab-based therapy: an exploratory analysis of the TRYPHAENA study.

INTRODUCTION: Molecular markers that predict responses to particular therapies are invaluable for optimization of patient treatment. The TRYPHAENA study showed that pertuzumab and trastuzumab with chemotherapy was an efficacious and tolerable combination for patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer in the neoadjuvant setting. We analyzed whether particular biomarkers correlated with the responses observed and therefore may predict outcomes in patients given pertuzumab plus trastuzumab. METHODS: We describe the analysis of a panel of biomarkers including HER2, human epidermal growth factor receptor 3 (HER3), epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), phosphatase and tensin homolog (PTEN), and phosphatidylinositol-4,5-bisphosphate 3-kinase catalytic subunit alpha (PIK3CA) by qRT-PCR, immunohistochemistry (IHC), fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), and PCR-based mutational analyses as appropriate. For each marker analyzed, patients were categorized into 'low' (generally below median) or 'high' (generally above median) subgroups at baseline and post-treatment. RESULTS: Correlation of marker subgroups with the achievement of a pathological complete response (pCR) (ypT0/is) was analyzed. HER2 protein and mRNA expression levels were associated with pCR rate in two of the three study arms and the pooled analyses. Correlations of biomarker status with pCR occurred in one individual arm only and the pooled analyses with EGFR and PTEN; however, interpretation of these results is limited by a strong imbalance in patient numbers between the high and low subgroups and inconsistency between arms. We also found no association between expression levels of TOP2A and pCR rate in either the anthracycline-containing or free arms of TRYPHAENA. CONCLUSIONS: According to these analyses, and in line with other analyses of pertuzumab and trastuzumab in the neoadjuvant setting, we conclude that HER2 expression remains the only marker suitable for patient selection for this regimen at present. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The TRYPHAENA study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00976989, on September 14 2009.

Safety profile of Pertuzumab with Trastuzumab and Docetaxel in patients from Asia with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive metastatic breast cancer: results from the phase III trial CLEOPATRA.

INTRODUCTION: We report detailed safety analyses by geographic region from the phase III study CLEOPATRA with pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and docetaxel in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive first-line metastatic breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients received pertuzumab/placebo at 840 mg in cycle 1 and 420 mg in subsequent cycles, and trastuzumab at 8 mg/kg in cycle 1 and 6 mg/kg in subsequent cycles; docetaxel was initiated at 75 mg/m(2). All study drugs were given intravenously, 3 times weekly. RESULTS: Docetaxel dose reductions below 75 mg/m(2) were more common in patients from Asia (47.0%) than other regions (13.4%); docetaxel dose escalations to 100 mg/m(2) were less frequent in Asia (2.4%) than other regions (18.7%). Rates of edema (26.1% and 5.4% for Asia and other regions, respectively), myalgia (42.3%, 14.7%), nail disorder (39.9%, 15.1%), febrile neutropenia (18.6%, 7.1%), upper respiratory tract infection (25.7%, 10.2%), decreased appetite (47.0%, 19.1%), and rash (44.3%, 22.0%) were at least twice as high in Asia as in other regions. Adverse events did not result in a reduction in the median number of study treatment cycles administered in patients from Asia. Efficacy analyses per region showed hazard ratios similar to those of the whole intention-to-treat (ITT) population for progression-free survival (ITT: 0.63; Asia: 0.68; other regions: 0.61) and overall survival (ITT: 0.66; Asia: 0.64; other regions: 0.66). CONCLUSION: Despite a higher proportion of docetaxel dose reductions in patients from Asia, survival benefits were comparable between regions. The benefit-risk profile of pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and docetaxel supports this regimen as the first-line therapy for patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer from all geographic regions.

Treatment of older patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer with pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and docetaxel: subgroup analyses from a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III trial (CLEOPATRA).

Although the incidence of cancer increases with age, older patients are under-represented in cancer treatment trials, resulting in limited data availability in this patient population. Here we present results from pre-defined subgroup analyses conducted by age group (<65 vs ≥ 65 years) from a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III trial in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer. Patients who had not received previous chemotherapy or biological therapy for HER2-positive locally recurrent, unresectable or metastatic breast cancer were randomly assigned to treatment with placebo, trastuzumab, and docetaxel or with pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and docetaxel. Primary endpoint was independently assessed progression-free survival. We performed pre-specified subgroup analyses of progression-free survival according to age. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00567190. 808 patients were enrolled. Of those, 127 patients were 65 years of age or older (placebo arm: 67, pertuzumab arm: 60). Patients in both age groups experienced progression-free survival benefit with treatment in the pertuzumab arm (<65 years: HR: 0.65; 95 % CI 0.53-0.80; ≥65 years: HR: 0.52; 95 % CI 0.31-0.86). Diarrhoea, fatigue, asthenia, decreased appetite, vomiting, and dysgeusia were reported more frequently in patients 65 years of age or older compared with younger patients. Neutropenia and febrile neutropenia were reported less frequently in the older age group. The efficacy and safety data reported in CLEOPATRA suggest that the combined use of pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and docetaxel should not be limited by patient age.

Absence of pharmacokinetic drug-drug interaction of pertuzumab with trastuzumab and docetaxel.

Pertuzumab is a novel antihuman epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) humanized monoclonal antibody. Combined with trastuzumab plus docetaxel, pertuzumab improved progression-free and overall survival versus trastuzumab plus docetaxel in the phase III CLEOPATRA trial (NCT00567190) in first-line HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer. Thirty-seven patients participated in a pharmacokinetic (PK)/corrected QT interval substudy of CLEOPATRA, which evaluated potential PK drug-drug interaction (DDI). PK parameters were calculated using noncompartmental methods, and DDI analyses were carried out. In the presence of trastuzumab and docetaxel, the mean pertuzumab Cmin and Cmax in cycle 3 were 63.6 and 183 µg/ml, respectively. The pertuzumab concentrations observed were consistent with simulations from a validated population PK model, indicating that trastuzumab and docetaxel did not alter pertuzumab PK. Comparison of geometric least-squares mean PK parameters between arms showed no impact of pertuzumab on the PK of trastuzumab or docetaxel. In conclusion, no PK DDI was observed when pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and docetaxel were combined for the treatment of HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer.

Pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and docetaxel for HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (CLEOPATRA study): overall survival results from a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: CLEOPATRA is a phase 3 study to compare the efficacy and safety of pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and docetaxel with placebo, trastuzumab, and docetaxel in patients with HER2-positive first-line metastatic breast cancer. The results of the primary analysis showed significantly longer median progression-free survival in the pertuzumab group than in the placebo group. Interim analysis of overall survival favoured the pertuzumab group but was not significant. Here, we report results for overall survival after an additional year of follow-up. METHODS: The study was a double-blind randomised trial undertaken at 204 centres in 25 countries. Patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer who had not received previous chemotherapy or biological treatment for their metastatic disease were randomly assigned to receive either pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and docetaxel (n=402) or the same regimen with a matching placebo replacing pertuzumab (n=406). Randomisation was in a 1:1 ratio, stratified by geographical region and previous treatment status. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (assessed independently), which has been reported previously; no follow-up data were gathered for the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints included overall survival, progression-free survival (assessed by investigator), objective response rate, and safety. Median follow-up was 30 months in both groups. Efficacy endpoints were analysed in the intention-to-treat population and safety was analysed by treatment received. The study is completed but safety and survival data continue to be followed up. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00567190. FINDINGS: In the intention-to-treat population, 267 patients died by data cutoff (May 14, 2012), 154 (38%) of 406 in the placebo group and 113 (28%) of 402 in the pertuzumab group. Median overall survival was 37.6 months (95% CI 34.3-NE [not estimable]) in the placebo group but had not been reached (95% CI 42.4-NE) in the pertuzumab group (hazard ratio 0.66, 95% CI 0.52-0.84; p=0.0008). Investigator-assessed median progression-free survival was 12.4 months (95% CI 10.4-13.5) in the placebo group and 18.7 months (16.6-21.6) in the pertuzumab group (hazard ratio 0.69, 95% CI 0.58-0.81). Serious adverse events were reported in 115 (29%) of 396 patients who received placebo, trastuzumab, and docetaxel and 148 (36%) of 408 who received pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and docetaxel, and included febrile neutropenia, neutropenia, diarrhoea, pneumonia, and cellulitis. Overall, adverse events were similar to those reported at the primary analysis with respect to frequency, severity, and specificity. INTERPRETATION: Our analysis shows a significant improvement in overall survival with pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and docetaxel in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer, compared with placebo, trastuzumab, and docetaxel. Since this effect was not achieved at the expense of adverse events, this regimen represents a substantial improvement on the standard of care for this population of patients. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche, Genentech.

Cardiac tolerability of pertuzumab plus trastuzumab plus docetaxel in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer in CLEOPATRA: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III study.

INTRODUCTION: We report cardiac tolerability of pertuzumab plus trastuzumab plus docetaxel versus placebo plus trastuzumab plus docetaxel observed in the phase III study CLEOPATRA in patients with HER2-positive first-line metastatic breast cancer (MBC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≥ 50% and ECOG performance status of 0 or 1 were required for study entry. During the study, LVEF assessments took place every 9 weeks. Pertuzumab/placebo was given at 840 mg, then 420 mg q3w; trastuzumab was administered at 8 mg/kg, then 6 mg/kg q3w, and docetaxel was initiated at 75 mg/m(2) q3w. RESULTS: The incidence of cardiac adverse events (all grades) was 16.4% in the placebo arm and 14.5% in the pertuzumab arm, with left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD, all grades) being the most frequently reported event (8.3% versus 4.4% in the placebo and pertuzumab arm). Declines in LVEF by ≥ 10% points from baseline and to <50% were reported in 6.6% and 3.8% of patients in the placebo and pertuzumab arm, respectively. Seventy-two percent (placebo arm) and 86.7% (pertuzumab arm) of those patients recovered to a value ≥ 50%. The incidence of symptomatic LVSD was low, occurring in 1.8% (n = 7) versus 1.0% (n = 4) of patients in the placebo and pertuzumab arm. In 8/11 patients, the symptomatic LVSD had resolved at data cutoff. CONCLUSION: The combination of pertuzumab plus trastuzumab plus docetaxel did not increase the incidence of cardiac adverse events, including LVSD, compared with the control arm in HER2-positive MBC. The majority of cardiac adverse events were reversible.

A phase Ib, dose-finding study of erlotinib in combination with a fixed dose of pertuzumab in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Pertuzumab, a dimerization inhibitor of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), has demonstrated pharmacodynamic activity, with stable disease in non-small-cell lung cancer. Combining erlotinib and pertuzumab may enhance antitumor activity. This study aimed to establish the recommended dosing of the erlotinib and pertuzumab combination; assess safety, preliminary efficacy, and pharmacokinetics; and analyze biomarkers. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifteen patients with stage IIIb/IV non-small-cell lung cancer who failed chemotherapy were recruited. The patients received erlotinib (days -8 to -1), then combination therapy (21-day cycles for 6 cycles). Pertuzumab was given intravenous at 840 mg, then 420 mg once every three weeks, with erlotinib given daily (100 or 150 mg). RESULTS: No dose-limiting toxicities were observed. Adverse events were generally grade 1/2 and manageable. The objective response rate was 20% (3/15 patients; 2 responders had mutant HER1, 1 responder had wild-type HER1), median overall progression-free survival was 9.3 weeks. High HER1, HER2, and HER3 messenger RNA expression correlated with increased progression-free survival. Combination therapy did not affect erlotinib's pharmacokinetics; however, pertuzumab mean exposures (maximum concentration, 231 mg/L; area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 21 days, 1780 mg*d/L) were slightly higher than in previous studies. CONCLUSIONS: Combination therapy was well tolerated in patients with good performance status, with encouraging efficacy. A loading dose of pertuzumab 840 mg followed by 420 mg once every three weeks plus daily erlotinib 150 mg appears to be the most appropriate regimen for this combination.

Pertuzumab monotherapy after trastuzumab-based treatment and subsequent reintroduction of trastuzumab: activity and tolerability in patients with advanced human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancer.

PURPOSE: The combination of pertuzumab and trastuzumab resulted in a clinical benefit rate (CBR) of 50% in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) -positive breast cancer whose disease progressed during prior trastuzumab-based therapy. To define whether this previously observed encouraging activity was a result of the combination of pertuzumab and trastuzumab or of pertuzumab alone, we recruited a third cohort of patients who received pertuzumab without trastuzumab. We then investigated the impact of reintroducing trastuzumab to patients whose disease progressed on pertuzumab monotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty-nine patients with HER2-positive breast cancer whose disease progressed during prior trastuzumab-based therapy received pertuzumab (840 mg loading dose, then 420 mg every 3 weeks) until progressive disease or unacceptable toxicity. Seventeen patients with disease progression continued to receive pertuzumab (at the same dose), with the addition of trastuzumab (4 mg/kg loading dose and then 2 mg/kg weekly or 8 mg/kg loading dose and then 6 mg/kg every 3 weeks). RESULTS: All 29 patients enrolled for pertuzumab monotherapy experienced disease progression. The objective response rate (ORR) and CBR were 3.4% and 10.3%, respectively, during pertuzumab monotherapy. With the addition of trastuzumab, the ORR and CBR were 17.6% and 41.2%, respectively. Progression-free survival was longer with combination therapy than pertuzumab monotherapy (17.4 v 7.1 weeks, respectively). Treatment was well tolerated with minimal cardiac dysfunction. CONCLUSION: Although pertuzumab has some activity in patients with HER2-positive breast cancer that progressed during therapy with trastuzumab, the combination of pertuzumab and trastuzumab seems to be more active than monotherapy.

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.

Pertuzumab plus trastuzumab plus docetaxel for metastatic breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: The anti-human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) humanized monoclonal antibody trastuzumab improves the outcome in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer. However, most cases of advanced disease eventually progress. Pertuzumab, an anti-HER2 humanized monoclonal antibody that inhibits receptor dimerization, has a mechanism of action that is complementary to that of trastuzumab, and combination therapy with the two antibodies has shown promising activity and an acceptable safety profile in phase 2 studies involving patients with HER2-positive breast cancer. METHODS: We randomly assigned 808 patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer to receive placebo plus trastuzumab plus docetaxel (control group) or pertuzumab plus trastuzumab plus docetaxel (pertuzumab group) as first-line treatment until the time of disease progression or the development of toxic effects that could not be effectively managed. The primary end point was independently assessed progression-free survival. Secondary end points included overall survival, progression-free survival as assessed by the investigator, the objective response rate, and safety. RESULTS: The median progression-free survival was 12.4 months in the control group, as compared with 18.5 months in the pertuzumab group (hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.62; 95% confidence interval, 0.51 to 0.75; P<0.001). The interim analysis of overall survival showed a strong trend in favor of pertuzumab plus trastuzumab plus docetaxel. The safety profile was generally similar in the two groups, with no increase in left ventricular systolic dysfunction; the rates of febrile neutropenia and diarrhea of grade 3 or above were higher in the pertuzumab group than in the control group. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of pertuzumab plus trastuzumab plus docetaxel, as compared with placebo plus trastuzumab plus docetaxel, when used as first-line treatment for HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer, significantly prolonged progression-free survival, with no increase in cardiac toxic effects. (Funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00567190.).

Phase II trial of pertuzumab and trastuzumab in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive metastatic breast cancer that progressed during prior trastuzumab therapy.

UNLABELLED: PURPOSE; Pertuzumab, a human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) -targeted monoclonal antibody, potently inhibits HER2 dimerization and HER-mediated signaling pathways. Pertuzumab and the approved HER2-targeted monoclonal antibody trastuzumab have complementary mechanisms of action and result in enhanced antitumor activity when combined. This phase II trial assessed the efficacy and safety profile of the combination in patients with HER2-positive breast cancer whose disease had progressed during prior trastuzumab-based therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a multicenter, open-label, single-arm, Simon two-stage study. Patients with advanced HER2-positive breast cancer in whom disease progression had occurred during prior trastuzumab-based therapy received trastuzumab weekly (4 mg/kg loading dose, then 2 mg/kg every week) or every 3 weeks (8 mg/kg loading dose, then 6 mg/kg every 3 weeks) and pertuzumab every 3 weeks (840 mg loading dose, then 420 mg every 3 weeks). Treatment continued until disease progression or excessive toxicity. RESULTS: All 66 patients were assessable for efficacy and safety. The objective response rate was 24.2%, and the clinical benefit rate was 50%. Five patients (7.6%) experienced a complete response, 11 patients (16.7%) experienced a partial response, and 17 patients (25.8%) experienced stable disease of > or = 6 months. Median progression-free survival was 5.5 months. Overall, the combination of pertuzumab and trastuzumab was well tolerated, and adverse events were mild to moderate. Cardiac dysfunction was minimal, and no patients withdrew as a result of cardiac-related adverse events. CONCLUSION: The combination of pertuzumab and trastuzumab is active and well tolerated in patients with metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer who had experienced progression during prior trastuzumab therapy.

Phase III study of oral compared with intravenous topotecan as second-line therapy in small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: Single-agent intravenous (IV) topotecan is an effective treatment for small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) after failure of first-line chemotherapy. This open-label, randomized, phase III study compared oral and IV topotecan in patients with SCLC sensitive to initial chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with limited- or extensive-disease SCLC, documented complete or partial response to first-line therapy, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status < or = 2, and measurable recurrent disease (WHO criteria) with a treatment-free interval of > or = 90 days were assigned to treatment with either oral topotecan 2.3 mg/m2/d on days 1 through 5 or IV topotecan 1.5 mg/m2/d on days 1 through 5 every 21 days. Primary end point was response rate as confirmed by an external reviewer blinded to treatment. RESULTS: A total of 309 patients were randomly assigned. In intent-to-treat analysis, response rates were 18.3% with oral topotecan (n = 153) and 21.9% with IV topotecan (n = 151), with a difference (oral -IV) of -3.6% (95% CI, -12.6% to 5.5%). Median survival time was 33.0 weeks for oral and 35.0 weeks for IV topotecan; 1- and 2-year survival rates were 32.6% and 12.4% for oral topotecan, respectively, and 29.2% and 7.1% for IV topotecan, respectively. Third-line chemotherapy was similar for both groups (33% for oral; 35% for IV). Incidence of grade 4 toxicity in patients who received oral and IV topotecan was as follows: neutropenia in 47% and 64%, thrombocytopenia in 29% and 18%, grade 3 or 4 anemia in 23% and 31%, and sepsis in 3% and 3%, respectively. The most frequent nonhematologic adverse events (all grades) included nausea (43% oral; 42% IV), alopecia (26% oral; 30% IV), fatigue (31% oral; 36% IV), and diarrhea (36% oral; 20% IV). CONCLUSION: Oral topotecan demonstrates activity and tolerability similar to IV topotecan in chemotherapy-sensitive SCLC patients and offers patients a convenient alternative to IV therapy.

Phase III trial comparing supportive care alone with supportive care with oral topotecan in patients with relapsed small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: For patients with small-cell lung cancer (SCLC), further chemotherapy is routinely considered at relapse after first-line therapy. However, proof of clinical benefit has not been documented. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study randomly assigned patients with relapsed SCLC not considered as candidates for standard intravenous therapy to best supportive care (BSC) alone (n = 70) or oral topotecan (2.3 mg/m2/d, days 1 through 5, every 21 days) plus BSC (topotecan; n = 71). RESULTS: In the intent-to-treat population, survival (primary end point) was prolonged in the topotecan group (log-rank P = .0104). Median survival with BSC was 13.9 weeks (95% CI, 11.1 to 18.6) and with topotecan, 25.9 weeks (95% CI, 18.3 to 31.6). Statistical significance for survival was maintained in a subgroup of patients with a short treatment-free interval (< or = 60 days). Response to topotecan was 7% partial and 44% stable disease. Patients on topotecan had slower quality of life deterioration and greater symptom control. Principal toxicities with topotecan were hematological: grade 4 neutropenia, 33%; grade 4 thrombocytopenia, 7%; and grade 3/4 anemia, 25%. Comparing topotecan with BSC, infection grade 2 was 14% versus 12% and sepsis 4% versus 1%; other grade 3/4 events included vomiting 3% versus 0, diarrhea 6% versus 0, dyspnea 3% versus 9%, and pain 3% versus 6%. Toxic deaths occurred in four patients (6%) in the topotecan arm. All cause mortality within 30 days of random assignment was 13% on BSC and 7% on topotecan. CONCLUSION: Chemotherapy with oral topotecan is associated with prolongation of survival and quality of life benefit in patients with relapsed SCLC.

Open-label, multicenter, randomized, phase III study comparing oral topotecan/cisplatin versus etoposide/cisplatin as treatment for chemotherapy-naive patients with extensive-disease small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: This open-label, randomized, multicenter phase III study compared oral topotecan/intravenous cisplatin (TC) with intravenous (IV) etoposide/cisplatin (PE) in patients with untreated extensive-disease small-cell lung cancer (ED-SCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 784 patients were randomly assigned to either oral topotecan 1.7 mg/m2/d x 5 with IV cisplatin 60 mg/m2 on day 5 (n = 389) or IV etoposide 100 mg/m2/d x 3 with IV cisplatin 80 mg/m2 on day 1 (n = 395) every 21 days. RESULTS: Overall survival (primary end point) was similar between groups (P = .48; median: TC, 39.3 weeks v PE, 40.3 weeks). One-year survival was 31% (95% CI, 27% to 36%) in both groups and the difference of -0.03 (95% CI, -6.53 to 6.47) met the predefined criteria of < or = 10% absolute difference for noninferiority of TC relative to PE. Response rates were similar between groups (TC, 63% v PE, 69%). Time to progression was slightly but statistically longer with PE (log-rank P = .02; median: TC, 24.1 weeks v PE, 25.1 weeks). The regimens were similarly tolerable. Grade 3/4 neutropenia occurred more frequently with PE (84% v 59%), whereas grade 3/4 anemia and thrombocytopenia occurred more frequently with TC (38% v 21% and 38% v 23%, respectively). Lung Cancer Symptom Scale scores were statistically better with PE, but the differences were small and of debatable clinical significance. CONCLUSION: Oral topotecan with cisplatin provides similar efficacy and tolerability to the standard (etoposide with cisplatin) in untreated ED-SCLC and may provide greater patient convenience compared with intravenous etoposide and cisplatin.

Phase III study comparing oral topotecan to intravenous docetaxel in patients with pretreated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: This open-label, randomized, multicenter, phase III study compared oral topotecan versus intravenous (IV) docetaxel in patients with previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with stage III or IV NSCLC, performance status < or = 2, who had received only one prior chemotherapy regimen, were randomly assigned to treatment with oral topotecan 2.3 mg/m2/d on days 1 to 5 or IV docetaxel 75 mg/m2 day 1 every 21 days. RESULTS: A total of 829 patients were randomly assigned. In intent-to-treat analysis, 1-year survival rates were 25.1% with topotecan and 28.7% with docetaxel. The difference of -3.6% (95% CI, -9.59% to 2.48%) met the predefined criteria for noninferiority of topotecan relative to docetaxel because the lower limit of the 95% CI was above -10%. Median survival was 27.9 weeks with topotecan and 30.7 weeks with docetaxel. Although not statistically significant (log-rank P = .057), the higher survival rate with docetaxel was maintained across the entire treatment period. The median time to progression was 11.3 weeks with topotecan versus 13.1 weeks with docetaxel (log-rank P = .02). The overall response rate was 5% in each group. Grade 3/4 neutropenia occurred more frequently with docetaxel (60% v 50%). Grade 3/4 anemia and thrombocytopenia occurred more frequently with topotecan (26% v 10% and 26% v 7%, respectively). CONCLUSION: Oral topotecan provides activity in the treatment of relapsed, locally advanced, unresectable NSCLC. Both regimens were well tolerated with differing safety profiles. Topotecan may provide an option for patients who desire an orally available treatment after relapse.

A randomised phase II study of the efficacy and safety of intravenous topotecan in combination with either cisplatin or etoposide in patients with untreated extensive disease small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: Topotecan (Hycamtin is active in small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). This phase II study investigated the efficacy and safety of topotecan in combination with either cisplatin or etoposide in untreated extensive disease SCLC (ED SCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with untreated ED SCLC were randomised to treatment with T/C (topotecan 1.25mg/(m(2)day) IV days 1-5, cisplatin 50mg/m(2) IV day 5; 41 patients) or T/E (topotecan 0.75 mg/(m(2)day) IV days 1-- 5, etoposide 60 mg/(m(2)day) IV days 1-5; 41 patients) every 21 days. Response was evaluated by strict radiological criteria. RESULTS: Response rates were similar for T/C (63.4%, 95% CI: 48.7-78.2%) and T/E (61.0%, 95% CI: 46-76%) with one patient in each arm who underwent complete response. Median survival was 41.6 weeks (9.6 months) for the T/C group and 43.7 weeks (10.1 months) for the T/E group. Toxicity was primarily haematological in both groups. The proportion of patients with grades 3-4 anaemia was significantly higher in the T/C arm (46.4%) versus 20% with the T/E arm (p=0.018). The proportion of patients with grade 4 neutropenia was not significantly lower with T/C (56.1%) than with T/E (65.0%, p=0.41), as was the incidence of associated events such as sepsis (T/C: 0%; T/E: 9.8%, p=0.11). The overall deliverability of either regimen was similar. The most frequent non-haematological adverse experiences of all grades per patient were nausea (T/C: 43.9%; T/E: 36.6%), and alopecia (T/C: 39.0%; T/E: 56.1%). Topotecan did not appear to increase the frequency of adverse events specifically associated with cisplatin. CONCLUSION: This study showed T/C and T/E to be effective and well tolerated in patients with ED SCLC and further evaluation of topotecan in first line SCLC is warranted.