Comparison of MAPIE versus MAP in patients with a poor response to preoperative chemotherapy for newly diagnosed high-grade osteosarcoma (EURAMOS-1): an open-label, international, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: We designed the EURAMOS-1 trial to investigate whether intensified postoperative chemotherapy for patients whose tumour showed a poor response to preoperative chemotherapy (≥10% viable tumour) improved event-free survival in patients with high-grade osteosarcoma. METHODS: EURAMOS-1 was an open-label, international, phase 3 randomised, controlled trial. Consenting patients with newly diagnosed, resectable, high-grade osteosarcoma aged 40 years or younger were eligible for randomisation. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either postoperative cisplatin, doxorubicin, and methotrexate (MAP) or MAP plus ifosfamide and etoposide (MAPIE) using concealed permuted blocks with three stratification factors: trial group; location of tumour (proximal femur or proximal humerus vs other limb vs axial skeleton); and presence of metastases (no vs yes or possible). The MAP regimen consisted of cisplatin 120 mg/m2, doxorubicin 37·5 mg/m2 per day on days 1 and 2 (on weeks 1 and 6) followed 3 weeks later by high-dose methotrexate 12 g/m2 over 4 h. The MAPIE regimen consisted of MAP as a base regimen, with the addition of high-dose ifosfamide (14 g/m2) at 2·8 g/m2 per day with equidose mesna uroprotection, followed by etoposide 100 mg/m2 per day over 1 h on days 1-5. The primary outcome measure was event-free survival measured in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00134030. FINDINGS: Between April 14, 2005, and June 30, 2011, 2260 patients were registered from 325 sites in 17 countries. 618 patients with poor response were randomly assigned; 310 to receive MAP and 308 to receive MAPIE. Median follow-up was 62·1 months (IQR 46·6-76·6); 62·3 months (IQR 46·9-77·1) for the MAP group and 61·1 months (IQR 46·5-75·3) for the MAPIE group. 307 event-free survival events were reported (153 in the MAP group vs 154 in the MAPIE group). 193 deaths were reported (101 in the MAP group vs 92 in the MAPIE group). Event-free survival did not differ between treatment groups (hazard ratio [HR] 0·98 [95% CI 0·78-1·23]); hazards were non-proportional (p=0·0003). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (268 [89%] patients in MAP vs 268 [90%] in MAPIE), thrombocytopenia (231 [78% in MAP vs 248 [83%] in MAPIE), and febrile neutropenia without documented infection (149 [50%] in MAP vs 217 [73%] in MAPIE). MAPIE was associated with more frequent grade 4 non-haematological toxicity than MAP (35 [12%] of 301 in the MAP group vs 71 [24%] of 298 in the MAPIE group). Two patients died during postoperative therapy, one from infection (although their absolute neutrophil count was normal), which was definitely related to their MAP treatment (specifically doxorubicin and cisplatin), and one from left ventricular systolic dysfunction, which was probably related to MAPIE treatment (specifically doxorubicin). One suspected unexpected serious adverse reaction was reported in the MAP group: bone marrow infarction due to methotrexate. INTERPRETATION: EURAMOS-1 results do not support the addition of ifosfamide and etoposide to postoperative chemotherapy in patients with poorly responding osteosarcoma because its administration was associated with increased toxicity without improving event-free survival. The results define standard of care for this population. New strategies are required to improve outcomes in this setting. FUNDING: UK Medical Research Council, National Cancer Institute, European Science Foundation, St Anna Kinderkrebsforschung, Fonds National de la Recherche Scientifique, Fonds voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek-Vlaanderen, Parents Organization, Danish Medical Research Council, Academy of Finland, Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Deutsche Krebshilfe, Federal Ministry of Education and Research, Semmelweis Foundation, ZonMw (Council for Medical Research), Research Council of Norway, Scandinavian Sarcoma Group, Swiss Paediatric Oncology Group, Cancer Research UK, National Institute for Health Research, University College London Hospitals, and Biomedical Research Centre.

Maintenance therapy in ovarian cancer.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Targeted therapies are being used as maintenance therapy to improve the outcome of ovarian cancer following standard treatment in the first-line setting and in recurrent disease. We review the different approaches being used, trial design, and the impact of maintenance treatment on survival and quality of life. RECENT FINDINGS: The greatest experience of maintenance therapy is with antiangiogenic agents. Several trials targeting vascular endothelial growth factor with bevacizumab or vascular endothelial growth factor receptor with oral tyrosine kinase inhibitors have demonstrated a prolongation in progression-free survival (PFS) following first or second-line treatment. Maintenance therapy with olaparib, a poly ADP ribose polymerase inhibitor given post-platinum therapy for recurrent disease, has led to a prolongation in PFS, particularly, in patients with a BRCA mutation. The results of immunotherapy maintenance studies, based on using cancer antigen 125 as an antigen, have been disappointing. A benefit in PFS often does not translate into overall survival improvement, largely because of crossover and postprogression therapies. This makes clinical interpretation of results more difficult. SUMMARY: The principle of using molecular targeted therapy to prolong the control of ovarian cancer has been clearly demonstrated. The greatest effect is on prolongation of PFS and, by adding to the effects of standard treatments, maintenance therapy is likely to help incrementally extend the 5-year survival of women with ovarian cancer.

Methotrexate, Doxorubicin, and Cisplatin (MAP) Plus Maintenance Pegylated Interferon Alfa-2b Versus MAP Alone in Patients With Resectable High-Grade Osteosarcoma and Good Histologic Response to Preoperative MAP: First Results of the EURAMOS-1 Good Response Randomized Controlled Trial.

PURPOSE: EURAMOS-1, an international randomized controlled trial, investigated maintenance therapy with pegylated interferon alfa-2b (IFN-α-2b) in patients whose osteosarcoma showed good histologic response (good response) to induction chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: At diagnosis, patients age ≤ 40 years with resectable high-grade osteosarcoma were registered. Eligibility after surgery for good response random assignment included ≥ two cycles of preoperative MAP (methotrexate, doxorubicin, and cisplatin), macroscopically complete surgery of primary tumor, < 10% viable tumor, and no disease progression. These patients were randomly assigned to four additional cycles MAP with or without IFN-α-2b (0.5 to 1.0 µg/kg per week subcutaneously, after chemotherapy until 2 years postregistration). Outcome measures were event-free survival (EFS; primary) and overall survival and toxicity (secondary). RESULTS: Good response was reported in 1,041 of 2,260 registered patients; 716 consented to random assignment (MAP, n = 359; MAP plus IFN-α-2b, n = 357), with baseline characteristics balanced by arm. A total of 271 of 357 started IFN-α-2b; 105 stopped early, and 38 continued to receive treatment at data freeze. Refusal and toxicity were the main reasons for never starting IFN-α-2b and for stopping prematurely, respectively. Median IFN-α-2b duration, if started, was 67 weeks. A total of 133 of 268 patients who started IFN-α-2b and provided toxicity information reported grade ≥ 3 toxicity during IFN-α-2b treatment. With median follow-up of 44 months, 3-year EFS for all 716 randomly assigned patients was 76% (95% CI, 72% to 79%); 174 EFS events were reported (MAP, n = 93; MAP plus IFN-α-2b, n = 81). Hazard ratio was 0.83 (95% CI, 0.61 to 1.12; P = .214) from an adjusted Cox model. CONCLUSION: At the preplanned analysis time, MAP plus IFN-α-2b was not statistically different from MAP alone. A considerable proportion of patients never started IFN-α-2b or stopped prematurely. Long-term follow-up for events and survival continues.

Biomarkers in the development of anti-angiogenic therapies for ovarian cancer.

The treatment of ovarian cancer remains challenging as the majority of patients will relapse and die from their disease despite successful first-line treatment. New treatment strategies are needed and recently there has been an explosion of new agents being tested in ovarian cancer. Most of these are directed against molecularly defined pathways and a significant proportion target angiogenesis, an important process in the growth of ovarian cancer. We review the role of angiogenesis in the pathophysiology of ovarian cancer and discuss the development of the most promising anti-angiogenic drugs in this disease, including the first large phase III trials with bevacizumab which have demonstrated a disease-modifying role in ovarian cancer. Other studies with this drug and other inhibitors of the angiogenic pathways are underway in the first-line and recurrent disease settings. The financial cost of these agents, increased toxicity and requirement for prolonged therapy necessitates the urgent need to identify and validate biomarkers to guide the use of these drugs in the future. There are over 200 candidate biomarkers being studied in ovarian cancer. However, currently there are no validated biomarkers to predict response or progression of disease. In this review we present a selection of biomarkers that are under investigation and discuss their benefits and limitations.

Presence of chemotherapy-induced toxicity predicts improved survival in patients with localised extremity osteosarcoma treated with doxorubicin and cisplatin: a report from the European Osteosarcoma Intergroup.

AIM: Chemotherapy-induced toxicity is an independent prognostic indicator in several cancers. We aimed to determine whether toxicity was related to survival and histological response in high-grade localised extremity osteosarcoma. We undertook a retrospective analysis of patients treated within three consecutive randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of the European Osteosarcoma Intergroup. METHODS: Between 1982 and 2002, 533 patients were randomised to six cycles of doxorubicin 75 mg/m(2) and cisplatin 100 mg/m(2). Toxicity data were collected prospectively and graded according to the World Health Organisation (WHO) criteria. Standard univariate and multivariate models were constructed to examine the relationship between reported toxicity, survival, and histological response. RESULTS: Five- and 10-year overall survival was 57% (95% confidence interval (CI) 52-61%) and 53% (49-58%), respectively. Grades 3-4 oral mucositis (hazard ratio (HR) 0.51, 95% CI 0.29-0.91), grades 1-2 nausea/vomiting (HR 0.37, 95% CI 0.16-0.85), grades 1-2 thrombocytopenia (HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.27-0.87), good histological response (HR 0.42, 95% CI 0.27-0.65), and distal tumour site (HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.28-0.71) were associated with improved survival in multivariate analysis. The only factors that were independently associated with histological response were older age (odds ratio (OR) 0.18, 95% CI 0.04-0.72) and chondroblastic tumour (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.10-0.77), both being associated with a significantly lower chance of achieving a good response. CONCLUSION: Chemotherapy-induced toxicity predicts survival in patients with localised extremity osteosarcoma. Investigation of the pharmacogenomic mechanisms of constitutional chemosensitivity underlying these observations will present opportunities for personalising treatment and could lead to improved outcomes.