RESUMO
Importance: Patients with locally advanced non-human papillomavirus (HPV) head and neck cancer (HNC) carry an unfavorable prognosis. Chemoradiotherapy (CRT) with cisplatin or anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) antibody improves overall survival (OS) of patients with stage III to IV HNC, and preclinical data suggest that a small-molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitor dual EGFR and ERBB2 (formerly HER2 or HER2/neu) inhibitor may be more effective than anti-EGFR antibody therapy in HNC. Objective: To examine whether adding lapatinib, a dual EGFR and HER2 inhibitor, to radiation plus cisplatin for frontline therapy of stage III to IV non-HPV HNC improves progression-free survival (PFS). Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter, phase 2, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial enrolled 142 patients with stage III to IV carcinoma of the oropharynx (p16 negative), larynx, and hypopharynx with a Zubrod performance status of 0 to 1 who met predefined blood chemistry criteria from October 18, 2012, to April 18, 2017 (median follow-up, 4.1 years). Data analysis was performed from December 1, 2020, to December 4, 2020. Intervention: Patients were randomized (1:1) to 70 Gy (6 weeks) plus 2 cycles of cisplatin (every 3 weeks) plus either 1500 mg per day of lapatinib (CRT plus lapatinib) or placebo (CRT plus placebo). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was PFS, with 69 events required. Progression-free survival rates between arms for all randomized patients were compared by 1-sided log-rank test. Secondary end points included OS. Results: Of the 142 patients enrolled, 127 (median [IQR] age, 58 [53-63] years; 98 [77.2%] male) were randomized; 63 to CRT plus lapatinib and 64 to CRT plus placebo. Final analysis did not suggest improvement in PFS (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.56-1.46; P = .34) or OS (hazard ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.61-1.86; P = .58) with the addition of lapatinib. There were no significant differences in grade 3 to 4 acute adverse event rates (83.3% [95% CI, 73.9%-92.8%] with CRT plus lapatinib vs 79.7% [95% CI, 69.4%-89.9%] with CRT plus placebo; P = .64) or late adverse event rates (44.4% [95% CI, 30.2%-57.8%] with CRT plus lapatinib vs 40.8% [95% CI, 27.1%-54.6%] with CRT plus placebo; P = .84). Conclusion and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, dual EGFR-ERBB2 inhibition with lapatinib did not appear to enhance the benefit of CRT. Although the results of this trial indicate that accrual to a non-HPV HNC-specific trial is feasible, new strategies must be investigated to improve the outcome for this population with a poor prognosis. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01711658.
Assuntos
Carcinoma , Neoplasias de Cabeça e Pescoço , Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Cisplatino/efeitos adversos , Lapatinib , Neoplasias de Cabeça e Pescoço/tratamento farmacológico , Carcinoma/tratamento farmacológico , Intervalo Livre de Progressão , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efeitos adversosRESUMO
Importance: Pathologic complete response (pCR) may be associated with prognosis in patients with soft tissue sarcoma (STS). Objective: We sought to determine the prognostic significance of pCR on survival outcomes in STS for patients receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CT-RT) (Radiation Therapy Oncology Group [RTOG] 9514) or preoperative image-guided radiotherapy alone (RT, RTOG 0630) and provide a long-term update of RTOG 0630. Design, Setting, and Participants: RTOG has completed 2 multi-institutional, nonrandomized phase 2 clinical trials for patients with localized STS. One hundred forty-three eligible patients from RTOG 0630 (n = 79) and RTOG 9514 (n = 64) were included in this ancillary analysis of pCR and 79 patients from RTOG 0630 were evaluated for long-term outcomes. Intervention: Patients in trial 9514 received CT interdigitated with RT, whereas those in trial 0630 received preoperative RT alone. Main Outcomes and Measures: Overall and disease-free survival (OS and DFS) rates were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Hazard ratios (HRs) and P values were estimated by multivariable Cox model stratified by study, where possible; otherwise, P values were calculated by stratified log-rank test. Analysis took place between December 14, 2016, to April 13, 2017. Results: Overall there were 42 (53.2%) men; 68 (86.1%) were white; with a mean (SD) age of 59.6 (14.5) years. For RTOG 0630, at median follow-up of 6.0 years, there was 1 new in-field recurrence and 1 new distant failure since the initial report. From both studies, 123 patients were evaluable for pCR: 14 of 51 (27.5%) in trial 9514 and 14 of 72 (19.4%) in trial 0630 had pCR. Five-year OS was 100% for patients with pCR vs 76.5% (95% CI, 62.3%-90.8%) and 56.4% (95% CI, 43.3%-69.5%) for patients with less than pCR in trials 9514 and 0630, respectively. Overall, pCR was associated with improved OS (P = .01) and DFS (HR, 4.91; 95% CI, 1.51-15.93; P = .008) relative to less than pCR. Five-year local failure rate was 0% in patients with pCR vs 11.7% (95% CI, 3.6%-25.1%) and 9.1% (95% CI, 3.3%-18.5%) for patients with less than pCR in 9514 and 0630, respectively. Histologic types other than leiomyosarcoma, liposarcoma, and myxofibrosarcoma were associated with worse OS (HR, 2.24; 95% CI, 1.12-4.45). Conclusions and Relevance: This ancillary analysis of 2 nonrandomized clinical trials found that pCR was associated with improved survival in patients with STS and should be considered as a prognostic factor of clinical outcomes for future studies. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: RTOG 0630 (NCT00589121); RTOG 9514 (NCT00002791).
Assuntos
Terapia Neoadjuvante , Sarcoma , Masculino , Adulto , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Feminino , Sarcoma/mortalidade , Prognóstico , Intervalo Livre de Progressão , Intervalo Livre de DoençaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Anaplastic thyroid cancer is a rare and aggressive cancer with no standard radiotherapy-based local treatment. Based on data suggesting synergy between pazopanib and paclitaxel in anaplastic thyroid cancer, NRG Oncology did a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised phase 2 clinical trial comparing concurrent paclitaxel and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) with the addition of pazopanib or placebo with the aim of improving overall survival in this patient population. METHODS: Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with a pathological diagnosis of anaplastic thyroid cancer, any TNM stage, Zubrod performance status of 0-2, no recent haemoptysis or bleeding, and no brain metastases. Patients were enrolled from 34 centres in the USA. Initially, a run-in was done to establish safety. In the randomised phase 2 trial, patients in the experimental group (pazopanib) received 2-3 weeks of weekly paclitaxel (80 mg/m2) intravenously and daily pazopanib suspension 400 mg orally followed by concurrent weekly paclitaxel (50 mg/m2), daily pazopanib (300 mg), and IMRT 66 Gy given in 33 daily fractions (2 Gy fractions). In the control group (placebo), pazopanib was replaced by matching placebo. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to the two treatment groups by permuted block randomisation by NRG Oncology with stratification by metastatic disease. All investigators, patients, and funders of the study were masked to group allocation. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This trial is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01236547, and is complete. FINDINGS: The safety run-showed the final dosing regimen to be safe based on two out of nine participants having adverse events of predefined concern. Between June 23, 2014, and Dec 30, 2016, 89 patients were enrolled to the phase 2 trial, of whom 71 were eligible (36 in the pazopanib group and 35 in the placebo group; 34 [48%] males and 37 [52%] females). At the final analysis (data cutoff March 9, 2020), with a median follow-up of 2·9 years (IQR 0·002-4·0), 61 patients had died. Overall survival was not significantly improved with pazopanib versus placebo, with a median overall survival of 5·7 months (95% CI 4·0-12·8) in the pazopanib group versus 7·3 months (4·3-10·6) in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·86, 95% CI 0·52-1·43; one-sided log-rank p=0·28). 1-year overall survival was 37·1% (95% CI 21·1-53·2) in the pazopanib group and 29·0% (13·2-44·8) in the placebo group. The incidence of grade 3-5 adverse events did not differ significantly between the treatment groups (pazopanib 88·9% [32 of 36 patients] and placebo 85·3% [29 of 34 patients]; p=0·73). The most common clinically significant grade 3-4 adverse events in the 70 eligible treated patients (36 in the pazopanib group and 34 in the placebo group) were dysphagia (13 [36%] vs 10 [29%]), radiation dermatitis (8 [22%] vs 13 [38%]), increased alanine aminotransferase (12 [33%] vs none), increased aspartate aminotransferase (eight [22%] vs none), and oral mucositis (five [14%] vs eight [24%]). Treatment-related serious adverse events were reported for 16 (44%) patients on pazopanib and 12 (35%) patients on placebo. The most common serious adverse events were dehydration and thromboembolic event (three [8%] each) in patients on pazopanib and oral mucositis (three [8%]) in those on placebo. There was one treatment-related death in each group (sepsis in the pazopanib group and pneumonitis in the placebo group). INTERPRETATION: To our knowledge, this study is the largest randomised anaplastic thyroid cancer study that has completed accrual showing feasibility in a multicenter NCI National Clinical Trials Network setting. Although no significant improvement in overall survival was recorded in the pazopanib group, the treatment combination was shown to be feasible and safe, and hypothesis-generating data that might warrant further investigation were generated. FUNDING: National Cancer Institute and Novartis.
Assuntos
Quimiorradioterapia , Carcinoma Anaplásico da Tireoide , Neoplasias da Glândula Tireoide , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efeitos adversos , Método Duplo-Cego , Paclitaxel/efeitos adversos , Carcinoma Anaplásico da Tireoide/tratamento farmacológico , Carcinoma Anaplásico da Tireoide/terapia , Neoplasias da Glândula Tireoide/tratamento farmacológico , Neoplasias da Glândula Tireoide/radioterapiaRESUMO
PURPOSE: The combination of cisplatin and radiation or cetuximab and radiation improves overall survival of patients with locoregionally advanced head and neck carcinoma. NRG Oncology conducted a phase 3 trial to test the hypothesis that adding cetuximab to radiation and cisplatin would improve progression-free survival (PFS). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Eligible patients with American Joint Committee on Cancer sixth edition stage T2 N2a-3 M0 or T3-4 N0-3 M0 were accrued from November 2005 to March 2009 and randomized to receive radiation and cisplatin without (arm A) or with (arm B) cetuximab. Outcomes were correlated with patient and tumor features. Late reactions were scored using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (version 3). RESULTS: Of 891 analyzed patients, 452 with a median follow-up of 10.1 years were alive at analysis. The addition of cetuximab did not improve PFS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.89-1.26; P = .74), with 10-year estimates of 43.6% (95% CI, 38.8- 48.4) for arm A and 40.2% (95% CI, 35.4-45.0) for arm B. Cetuximab did not reduce locoregional failure (HR, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.95-1.53; P = .94) or distant metastasis (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.54-1.14; P = .10) or improve overall survival (HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.80-1.16; P = .36). Cetuximab did not appear to improve PFS in either p16-positive oropharynx (HR, 1.30; 95% CI, 0.87-1.93) or p16-negative oropharynx or nonoropharyngeal primary (HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.73-1.21). Grade 3 to 4 late toxicity rates were 57.4% in arm A and 61.3% in arm B (P = .26). CONCLUSIONS: With a median follow-up of more than 10 years, this updated report confirms the addition of cetuximab to radiation therapy and cisplatin did not improve any measured outcome in the entire cohort or when stratifying by p16 status.
Assuntos
Cisplatino , Neoplasias de Cabeça e Pescoço , Humanos , Cetuximab/efeitos adversos , Cisplatino/efeitos adversos , Resultado do Tratamento , Quimiorradioterapia/métodos , Neoplasias de Cabeça e Pescoço/tratamento farmacológico , Neoplasias de Cabeça e Pescoço/radioterapiaRESUMO
Purpose: An evolutionary action scoring algorithm (EAp53) based on phylogenetic sequence variations stratifies patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) bearing TP53 missense mutations as high-risk, associated with poor outcomes, or low-risk, with similar outcomes as TP53 wild-type, and has been validated as a reliable prognostic marker. We performed this study to further validate prior findings demonstrating that EAp53 is a prognostic marker for patients with locally advanced HNSCC and explored its predictive value for treatment outcomes to adjuvant bio-chemoradiotherapy. Methods and Materials: Eighty-one resection samples from patients treated surgically for stage III or IV human papillomavirus-negative HNSCC with high-risk pathologic features, who received either radiation therapy + cetuximab + cisplatin (cisplatin) or radiation therapy + cetuximab + docetaxel (docetaxel) as adjuvant treatment in a phase 2 study were subjected to TP53 targeted sequencing and EAp53 scoring to correlate with clinical outcomes. Due to the limited sample size, patients were combined into 2 EAp53 groups: (1) wild-type or low-risk; and (2) high-risk or other. Results: At a median follow-up of 9.8 years, there was a significant interaction between EAp53 group and treatment for overall survival (P = .008), disease-free survival (P = .05), and distant metastasis (DM; P = .004). In wild-type or low-risk group, the docetaxel arm showed significantly better overall survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.11, [0.03-0.36]), disease-free survival (HR 0.24, [0.09-0.61]), and less DM (HR 0.04, [0.01-0.31]) than the cisplatin arm. In high-risk or other group, differences between treatments were not statistically significant. Conclusions: The docetaxel arm was associated with better survival than the cisplatin arm for patients with wild-type or low-risk EAp53. These benefits appear to be largely driven by a reduction in DM.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: A better understanding of the relationship between the spread of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) to regional lymph nodes (LNs) and the frequency and manner of treatment failure should help design better treatment intensification strategies. In this study, we evaluated the relationship between recurrence patterns, mortality, and number of pathologically positive (+) LNs in HNSCC in 3 prospective randomized controlled trials. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We performed a secondary analysis of 947 patients with HNSCC enrolled in RTOG 9501 (nâ¯=â¯410), RTOG 0234 (nâ¯=â¯203), and EORTC 22931 (nâ¯=â¯334) undergoing surgery and postoperative radiation ± systemic therapy. Multivariable models were constructed for overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), locoregional relapse (LRR), and distant metastases (DM). Restricted cubic splines were used to model the nonlinear relationship between +LN number and outcomes. RESULTS: In multivariable analysis, OS and DFS decreased with each +LN without plateau, most pronounced up to 5 +LNs (OS: hazard ratio [HR], 1.21 per +LN; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.10-1.34; P < .001; DFS: HR per +LN, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.08-1.30; P < .001) and more gradually beyond this (OS: HR per +LN, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01-1.06; P < .001; DFS: HR per +LN, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.02-1.06; P < .001). In contrast to LRR risk, which increased sharply up to 5 +LNs (HR per +LN, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.10-1.50; P < .001) but plateaued beyond this (HR per +LN, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.96-1.04; Pâ¯=â¯.98), DM risk increased continuously with increasing +LNs (≤5 +LNs: HR per +LN, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.01-1.20; Pâ¯=â¯.04; >5 +LNs: HR per +LN, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.02-1.08; Pâ¯=â¯.003). CONCLUSIONS: In high-risk resected HNSCC, increased mortality was associated with increased +LN count. LRR and DM risk both increased in parallel up to 5 +LNs, but only DM continued to increase for further +LN increases. These differing recurrence patterns can help inform design of future treatments.
Assuntos
Neoplasias de Cabeça e Pescoço , Recidiva Local de Neoplasia , Neoplasias de Cabeça e Pescoço/patologia , Neoplasias de Cabeça e Pescoço/radioterapia , Humanos , Linfonodos/patologia , Recidiva Local de Neoplasia/patologia , Estadiamento de Neoplasias , Prognóstico , Estudos Prospectivos , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Estudos Retrospectivos , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas de Cabeça e Pescoço/patologia , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas de Cabeça e Pescoço/radioterapiaRESUMO
Clinical trials are studies to test new treatments in humans. Typically, these treatments are evaluated over several phases to assess their safety and efficacy. Phase 1 trials are designed to evaluate the safety and tolerability of a new treatment, typically with a small number of patients (eg, 20-80), generally spread across several dose levels. Phase 2 trials are designed to determine whether the new treatment has sufficiently promising efficacy to warrant further investigation in a large-scale randomized phase 3 trial, as well as to further assess safety. These studies usually involve a few hundred patients. This article provides an overview of some of the most commonly used phase 2 designs for clinical trials and emphasizes their critical elements and considerations. Key references to some of the most commonly used phase 2 designs are given to allow the reader to explore in more detail the critical aspects when planning a phase 2 trial. A comparison of 3 potential designs in the context of the NRG-HN002 trial is presented to complement the discussion about phase 2 trials.