Defining aggressive or early progressing nononcogene-addicted non-small-cell lung cancer: a separate disease entity?

A substantial proportion of patients with nononcogene-addicted non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has 'aggressive disease', as reflected in short time to progression or lack of disease control with initial platinum-based chemotherapy. Recently, clinical correlates of aggressive disease behavior during first-line therapy have been shown to predict greater benefit from addition of nintedanib to second-line docetaxel in adenocarcinoma NSCLC. Positive predictive effects of aggressive disease have since been reported with other anti-angiogenic agents (ramucirumab and bevacizumab), while such features may negatively impact on outcomes with nivolumab in nonsquamous NSCLC with low PD-L1 expression. Based on a review of the clinical data, we recommend aggressive nonsquamous NSCLC should be defined by progression within <6-9 months of first-line treatment initiation.

Docetaxel plus nintedanib versus docetaxel plus placebo in patients with previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer (LUME-Lung 1): a phase 3, double-blind, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The phase 3 LUME-Lung 1 study assessed the efficacy and safety of docetaxel plus nintedanib as second-line therapy for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: Patients from 211 centres in 27 countries with stage IIIB/IV recurrent NSCLC progressing after first-line chemotherapy, stratified by ECOG performance status, previous bevacizumab treatment, histology, and presence of brain metastases, were allocated (by computer-generated sequence through an interactive third-party system, in 1:1 ratio), to receive docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) by intravenous infusion on day 1 plus either nintedanib 200 mg orally twice daily or matching placebo on days 2-21, every 3 weeks until unacceptable adverse events or disease progression. Investigators and patients were masked to assignment. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) by independent central review, analysed by intention to treat after 714 events in all patients. The key secondary endpoint was overall survival, analysed by intention to treat after 1121 events had occurred, in a prespecified stepwise order: first in patients with adenocarcinoma who progressed within 9 months after start of first-line therapy, then in all patients with adenocarcinoma, then in all patients. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00805194. FINDINGS: Between Dec 23, 2008, and Feb 9, 2011, 655 patients were randomly assigned to receive docetaxel plus nintedanib and 659 to receive docetaxel plus placebo. The primary analysis was done after a median follow-up of 7·1 months (IQR 3·8-11·0). PFS was significantly improved in the docetaxel plus nintedanib group compared with the docetaxel plus placebo group (median 3·4 months [95% CI 2·9-3·9] vs 2·7 months [2·6-2·8]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·79 [95% CI 0·68-0·92], p=0·0019). After a median follow-up of 31·7 months (IQR 27·8-36·1), overall survival was significantly improved for patients with adenocarcinoma histology who progressed within 9 months after start of first-line treatment in the docetaxel plus nintedanib group (206 patients) compared with those in the docetaxel plus placebo group (199 patients; median 10·9 months [95% CI 8·5-12·6] vs 7·9 months [6·7-9·1]; HR 0·75 [95% CI 0·60-0·92], p=0·0073). Similar results were noted for all patients with adenocarcinoma histology (322 patients in the docetaxel plus nintedanib group and 336 in the docetaxel plus placebo group; median overall survival 12·6 months [95% CI 10·6-15·1] vs 10·3 months [95% CI 8·6-12·2]; HR 0·83 [95% CI 0·70-0·99], p=0·0359), but not in the total study population (median 10·1 months [95% CI 8·8-11·2] vs 9·1 months [8·4-10·4]; HR 0·94, 95% CI 0·83-1·05, p=0·2720). Grade 3 or worse adverse events that were more common in the docetaxel plus nintedanib group than in the docetaxel plus placebo group were diarrhoea (43 [6·6%] of 652 vs 17 [2·6%] of 655), reversible increases in alanine aminotransferase (51 [7·8%] vs six [0·9%]), and reversible increases in aspartate aminotransferase (22 [3·4%] vs three [0·5%]). 35 patients in the docetaxel plus nintedanib group and 25 in the docetaxel plus placebo group died of adverse events possibly unrelated to disease progression; the most common of these events were sepsis (five with docetaxel plus nintedanib vs one with docetaxel plus placebo), pneumonia (two vs seven), respiratory failure (four vs none), and pulmonary embolism (none vs three). INTERPRETATION: Nintedanib in combination with docetaxel is an effective second-line option for patients with advanced NSCLC previously treated with one line of platinum-based therapy, especially for patients with adenocarcinoma. FUNDING: Boehringer Ingelheim.

Nintedanib in combination with pemetrexed and cisplatin for chemotherapy-naive patients with advanced malignant pleural mesothelioma (LUME-Meso): a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Nintedanib targets VEGF receptors 1-3, PDGF receptors α and ß, FGF receptors 1-3, and Src and Abl kinases, which are all implicated in malignant pleural mesothelioma pathogenesis. Here, we report the final results of the phase 3 part of the LUME-Meso trial, which aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of pemetrexed plus cisplatin combined with nintedanib or placebo in unresectable malignant pleural mesothelioma. METHODS: This double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial was done at 120 academic medical centres and community clinics in 27 countries across the world. Chemotherapy-naive adults (aged ≥18 years) with unresectable epithelioid malignant pleural mesothelioma and ECOG performance status 0-1 were randomly assigned 1:1 via an independently verified random number-generating system to receive up to six 21-day cycles of pemetrexed (500 mg/m2) plus cisplatin (75 mg/m2) on day 1, then nintedanib (200 mg twice daily) or matched placebo on days 2-21. Patients without disease progression after six cycles received nintedanib or placebo maintenance on days 1-21 of each cycle. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (investigator-assessed according to mRECIST) in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of their assigned study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01907100. FINDINGS: Between April 14, 2016, and Jan 5, 2018, 541 patients were screened and 458 were randomly assigned to either the nintedanib group (n=229) or the placebo group (n=229). Median treatment duration was 5·3 months (IQR 2·8-7·3) in the nintedanib group and 5·1 months (2·7-7·8) in the placebo group. After 250 events, progression-free survival was not different between the nintedanib group (median 6·8 months [95% CI 6·1-7·0]) and the placebo group (7·0 months [6·7-7·2]; HR 1·01 [95% CI 0·79-1·30], p=0·91). The most frequently reported grade 3 or worse adverse event in both treatment groups was neutropenia (73 [32%] in the nintedanib group vs 54 [24%] in the placebo group). Serious adverse events were reported in 99 (44%) patients in the nintedanib group and 89 (39%) patients in the placebo group. The only serious adverse event occurring in at least 5% of patients in either group was pulmonary embolism (13 [6%] vs seven [3%]). INTERPRETATION: The primary progression-free survival endpoint of the phase 3 part of LUME-Meso was not met and phase 2 findings were not confirmed. No unexpected safety findings were reported. FUNDING: Boehringer Ingelheim.

Time since start of first-line therapy as a predictive clinical marker for nintedanib in patients with previously treated non-small cell lung cancer.

INTRODUCTION: No predictive clinical or genetic markers have been identified or validated for antiangiogenic agents in lung cancer. We aimed to identify a predictive clinical marker of benefit for nintedanib, an angiokinase inhibitor, using data from two large second-line non-small cell lung cancer Phase III trials (LUME-Lung 1 ([LL1] and LUME-Lung 2). METHODS: Predictive marker identification was conducted in a multi-step process using data from both trials; a hypothesis was generated, confirmed and validated. Statistical analyses included a stepwise selection approach, a recursive partitioning method and the evaluation of HRs, including treatment-by-covariate interactions. The marker was finally validated using a prospectively defined hierarchical testing procedure and treatment-by-covariate interaction for overall survival (OS) based on LL1. RESULTS: Time since start of first-line therapy (TSFLT) was identified as the only predictive clinical marker. A cut-off of 9 months was chosen for further analysis, based on HRs and recursive partitioning. The prospectively defined final validation using OS data from LL1 established the strong relationship between TSFLT and treatment with nintedanib. Patients with adenocarcinoma with TSFLT <9 months showed a greater survival benefit (median OS 10.9 vs 7.9 months, HR 0.75 [95% CI 0.60-0.92]; p=0.0073) compared with patients in the TSFLT >9 months group (median OS 17.0 vs 15.1 months, HR 0.89 [95% CI 0.66-1.19]). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with shorter TSFLT derive a greater progression-free survival and OS benefit from nintedanib. This clinical marker could be used for patient selection and further investigation is warranted regarding pathways promoting aggressive tumour growth and antiangiogenic tyrosine kinase inhibitor benefit.

Nintedanib Plus Pemetrexed/Cisplatin in Patients With Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma: Phase II Results From the Randomized, Placebo-Controlled LUME-Meso Trial.

Purpose LUME-Meso is a phase II/III randomized, double-blind trial designed to assess efficacy and safety of nintedanib plus chemotherapy as first-line treatment of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). Phase II results are reported here. Patients and Methods Chemotherapy-naïve patients with unresectable, nonsarcomatoid MPM (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 to 1), stratified by histology (epithelioid or biphasic), were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to up to six cycles of pemetrexed and cisplatin plus nintedanib (200 mg twice daily) or placebo followed by nintedanib plus placebo monotherapy until progression. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Results Eighty-seven patients were randomly assigned. The median number of pemetrexed and cisplatin cycles was six; the median treatment duration for nintedanib was 7.8 months and 5.3 months for placebo. Primary PFS favored nintedanib (hazard ratio [HR], 0.56; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.91; P = .017), which was confirmed in updated PFS analyses (HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.87; P = .010). A trend toward improved overall survival also favored nintedanib (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.46 to 1.29; P = .319). Benefit was evident in epithelioid histology, with a median overall survival gain of 5.4 months (HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.40 to 1.21; P = .197; median [nintedanib v placebo], 20.6 months v 15.2 months) and median PFS gain of 4.0 months (HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.30 to 0.82; P = .006; median [nintedanib v placebo], 9.7 v 5.7 months). Neutropenia was the most frequent grade ≥ 3 adverse event (AE; nintedanib 43.2% v placebo 12.2%); rates of febrile neutropenia were low (4.5% in nintedanib group v 0% in placebo group). AEs leading to discontinuation were reported in 6.8% of those receiving nintedanib versus 17.1% of those in the placebo group. Conclusion Addition of nintedanib to pemetrexed plus cisplatin resulted in PFS improvement. AEs were manageable. The clinical benefit was evident in patients with epithelioid histology. The confirmatory phase III part of the study is ongoing.

Nintedanib plus pemetrexed versus placebo plus pemetrexed in patients with relapsed or refractory, advanced non-small cell lung cancer (LUME-Lung 2): A randomized, double-blind, phase III trial.

OBJECTIVES: LUME-Lung 2 investigated the efficacy/safety of nintedanib plus pemetrexed in patients with pretreated non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with stage IIIB/IV or recurrent non-squamous NSCLC who had received one prior chemotherapy regimen were randomized (1:1 stratified by histology [adenocarcinoma/non-adenocarcinoma], prior bevacizumab, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status and presence of brain metastases) to receive intravenous pemetrexed 500mg/m2 on Day 1 plus nintedanib 200mg orally twice daily or matching placebo on Days 2-21, every 3 weeks until progression/unacceptable toxicity. Progression-free survival (PFS) by independent central review was the primary endpoint. Overall survival (OS) was the key secondary endpoint. RESULTS: Based on the pre-planned futility analysis of investigator-assessed PFS, conducted by an independent data monitoring committee, recruitment was halted on 18 June 2011 after 713 (n=353 nintedanib/pemetrexed; n=360 placebo/pemetrexed)/1300 planned patients had enrolled. There were no safety concerns. Subsequent analysis demonstrated a significant improvement in PFS favoring nintedanib/pemetrexed over placebo/pemetrexed (median 4.4 months vs 3.6 months; hazard ratio [HR]=0.83, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.70-0.99, p=0.0435). There was no significant difference in OS (median 12.0 months vs 12.7 months; HR=1.01, 95% CI 0.85-1.21, p=0.8940) after 514 deaths. Nintedanib/pemetrexed resulted in a higher incidence of grade ≥3 elevated alanine aminotransferase (23.3% vs 7.3%), elevated aspartate aminotransferase (12.1% vs 1.7%) and diarrhea (3.5% vs 1.1%) compared with placebo/pemetrexed, but no difference in hypertension, bleeding or thrombosis. CONCLUSION: Although recruitment stopped prematurely, combining nintedanib with pemetrexed significantly prolonged PFS in patients with advanced non-squamous NSCLC after first-line chemotherapy, with a manageable safety profile.

BIBF1120 (Vargatef) Inhibits Preretinal Neovascularization and Enhances Normal Vascularization in a Model of Vasoproliferative Retinopathy.

PURPOSE: This study evaluated the effects of BIBF1120, a novel triple angiokinase inhibitor against pathological retinal neovascularization. METHODS: BIBF1120 effect on development of the normal retinal vasculature was evaluated in Sprague-Dawley rat pups. Two models of ischemic oxygen-induced retinopathy (OIR) and the aortic ring assay were used to assess the antiangiogenic effects of BIBF1120. In the vaso-obliteration model (VO), rat pups were exposed to 80% O2 from postnatal day (P) 5 to P10. In the preretinal neovascularization (NV) model, rat pups were exposed to cycling O2 (50% and 10%) from P1 to P14, followed by room air until P18. Animals were intravitreally or orally treated with BIBF1120. Retinal vasculature, VO, and NV were evaluated in retinal flat mounts. Retinal expression of VEGF, Delta-like ligand 4 (Dll4), Netrin-1, Ephrin-B2, and EphB4 was analyzed by quantitative PCR and Western blot analysis. RESULTS: BIBF1120 interfered with normal retinal vascular development and microvessel branching in the aortic assay. However, in VO model BIBF1120 did not accrue VO. On the contrary, in the NV model BIBF1120 accelerated normal retinal vascularization and robustly diminished preretinal neovascularization compared to vehicle (by ~80%). The expression levels of VEGF negative regulator Dll4 and repulsive cues EphrinB2 and EphB4 mRNA in the retina of vehicle-treated OIR animals were markedly increased compared to normoxia, but were normalized by BIBF1120. CONCLUSIONS: Data reveal efficacy of BIBF1120 on preretinal neovascularization and, of greater interest, on acceleration of normal vascularization, consistent with interference of major repulsive cues expressed in the retina during OIR. Accordingly, BIBF1120 appears to exhibit preferable properties compared to anti-VEGF therapies for the treatment of ischemic retinopathies.

Anti-angiogenic-specific adverse events in patients with non-small cell lung cancer treated with nintedanib and docetaxel.

OBJECTIVES: LUME-Lung 1 was a randomized, placebo-controlled, Phase III trial investigating nintedanib+docetaxel versus placebo+docetaxel in patients with advanced NSCLC progressing after first-line chemotherapy. Progression-free survival was significantly improved with nintedanib+docetaxel in the overall population and overall survival was significantly improved in the pre-specified analysis of patients with adenocarcinoma. We evaluated the frequency of characteristic adverse events (AEs) commonly seen with existing anti-angiogenic agents. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The incidence and intensity of AEs were evaluated in all patients who received at least one dose of study medication (N=1307) and for the two main histologies: adenocarcinoma (n=653) and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC; n=553). AEs of special interest were analyzed by category, preferred term, and worst CTCAE grade and included perforation, hypertension, bleeding, thromboembolic events, and skin disorders. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: The incidence of patients with all-grade gastrointestinal (GI) perforations was low and balanced between arms (0.5% in both) and across histologies; the incidence of non-GI perforations was 1.2% with nintedanib+docetaxel versus 0.2% with placebo+docetaxel. The incidence of some events was higher with nintedanib+docetaxel versus placebo+docetaxel; hypertension (3.5% vs 0.9%), rash (11.0% vs 8.1%), and cutaneous adverse reactions (13.0% vs 10.7%). Rash and cutaneous adverse reactions were predominantly Grade 1-2 with both treatments. The incidence of all-grade bleeding was also slightly higher in nintedanib+docetaxel-treated patients (14.1% vs 11.6%) driven by between-treatment differences in the SCC subpopulation; most events were Grade 1-2. The proportion of patients with a thromboembolic event was low and comparable between arms for all grades (5.1% vs 4.6%) and Grade ≥3 (2.1% vs 3.1%). Safety evaluation of the LUME-Lung 1 study showed that the frequency of AEs commonly associated with other anti-angiogenic agents was lower with nintedanib+docetaxel. Survival benefits from addition of nintedanib to docetaxel in patients with adenocarcinoma after first-line therapy can be achieved alongside a manageable safety profile.

Analysis of patient-reported outcomes from the LUME-Lung 1 trial: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, Phase III study of second-line nintedanib in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

INTRODUCTION: The LUME-Lung 1 trial (NCT00805194; Study 1199.13) demonstrated a significant overall survival (OS) advantage for nintedanib plus docetaxel compared with placebo plus docetaxel as second-line therapy for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and adenocarcinoma histology. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for symptoms and health-related quality of life (QoL) are reported here. METHODS: PROs were assessed at screening, on Day 1 of each 21-day treatment cycle, at the end of active treatment, and at the first follow-up visit. PRO instruments were the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 and Lung Cancer-13 supplement, and the EuroQol disease-generic questionnaire (EQ-5D and EQ-VAS). Analyses of PRO items for lung cancer-specific symptoms of cough, dyspnoea and pain were prespecified. RESULTS: Rates of questionnaire completion were high. There was no significant difference in time to deterioration of global health status/QoL, or symptoms of cough, dyspnoea or pain, between the treatment groups for both the overall study population and the adenocarcinoma population. Time to deterioration of some gastrointestinal events was shorter with nintedanib versus placebo. Longitudinal analysis for the adenocarcinoma population showed comparable changes between the groups in symptom scores over time, with numerical differences in favour of nintedanib for cough and pain scales, and significant reductions in some pain items with nintedanib versus placebo. There was no statistically significant difference in EQ-5D or EQ-VAS between the groups. CONCLUSION: The significant OS benefit observed with the addition of nintedanib to docetaxel therapy was achieved with no detrimental effect on patient self-reported QoL.

Comparing safety and efficacy of first-line irinotecan/fluoropyrimidine combinations in elderly versus nonelderly patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: findings from the bolus, infusional, or capecitabine with camptostar-celecoxib study.

BACKGROUND: Irinotecan-based chemotherapy regimens are 1 option for treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The authors report the safety and efficacy of such regimens in elderly patients using a large phase III trial (bolus, infusional, or capecitabine with camptostar-celecoxib [BICC-C]) cohort. METHODS: In period 1, 430 previously untreated patients with mCRC were randomized in a 3-by-2 design to receive irinotecan plus infusional 5-fluorouracil, and leucovorin (FOLFIRI), irinotecan plus bolus 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin (mIFL), and irinotecan plus oral capecitabine (CapeIRI). In period 2, an additional 117 patients were randomized to receive FOLFIRI or mIFL and bevacizumab. In both periods patients were also randomized to a double-blind treatment with celecoxib or placebo. A secondary analysis was conducted examining the safety and efficacy of these regimens in elderly (age >70 years) versus nonelderly (age

Randomized, controlled trial of irinotecan plus infusional, bolus, or oral fluoropyrimidines in first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: results from the BICC-C Study.

PURPOSE: This phase III study compared the safety and efficacy of the following three different irinotecan-containing regimens in the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: irinotecan plus infusional fluorouracil (FU)/leucovorin (LV) (FOLFIRI), irinotecan plus bolus FU/LV (mIFL), and irinotecan plus oral capecitabine (CapeIRI). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 430 previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer patients were randomly assigned to receive FOLFIRI (n = 144), mIFL (n = 141), or CapeIRI (n = 145). Patients were concurrently randomly assigned to a double-blind treatment with celecoxib or placebo. After a protocol amendment, an additional 117 patients were randomly assigned to either FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab (FOLFIRI+Bev; n = 57) or mILF plus bevacizumab (mIFL+Bev; n = 60), whereas the CapeIRI arm was discontinued. The primary study end point was progression-free survival (PFS), with secondary end points of overall survival (OS), response rate, and toxicity. RESULTS: Median PFS was 7.6 months for FOLFIRI, 5.9 months for mIFL (P = .004 for the comparison with FOLFIRI), and 5.8 months for CapeIRI (P = .015). Median OS was 23.1 months for FOLFIRI, 17.6 months for mIFL (P = .09), and 18.9 months for CapeIRI (P = .27). CapeIRI was associated with higher rates of severe vomiting, diarrhea, and dehydration. After the amendment to add bevacizumab, the median survival time has not yet been reached for FOLFIRI+Bev and was 19.2 months for mIFL+Bev (P = .007). FOLFIRI+Bev was associated with a higher rate of > or = grade 3 hypertension than mIFL+Bev. CONCLUSION: FOLFIRI and FOLFIRI+Bev offered superior activity to their comparators and were comparably safe. An infusional schedule of FU should be the preferred irinotecan-based regimen in first-line metastatic colorectal cancer.