Cabozantinib and Panitumumab for RAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

LESSONS LEARNED: Antitumor activity was observed in the study population. Dose modifications of cabozantinib improve long-term tolerability. Biomarkers are needed to identify patient populations most likely to benefit. Further study of cabozantinib with or without panitumumab in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer is warranted. BACKGROUND: The epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) antibody panitumumab is active in patients with RAS wild-type (WT) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), but nearly all patients experience resistance. MET amplification is a driver of panitumumab resistance. Cabozantinib is an inhibitor of multiple kinases, including vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2 (VEGFR2) and c-MET, and may delay or reverse anti-EGFR resistance. METHODS: In this phase Ib clinical trial, we established the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of cabozantinib and panitumumab. We then treated an expansion cohort to further describe the tolerability and clinical activity of the RP2D. Eligibility included patients with KRAS WT mCRC (later amended to include only RAS WT mCRC) who had received prior treatment with a fluoropyrimidine, oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and bevacizumab. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients were enrolled and treated. The MTD/RP2D was cabozantinib 60 mg p.o. daily and panitumumab 6 mg/kg I.V. every 2 weeks. The objective response rate (ORR) was 16%. Median progression free survival (PFS) was 3.7 months (90% confidence interval [CI], 2.3-7.1). Median overall survival (OS) was 12.1 months (90% CI, 7.5-14.3). Five patients (20%) discontinued treatment due to toxicity, and 18 patients (72%) required a dose reduction of cabozantinib. CONCLUSION: The combination of cabozantinib and panitumumab has activity. Dose reductions of cabozantinib improve tolerability.

Adverse event load, onset, and maximum grade: A novel method of reporting adverse events in cancer clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Current adverse event reporting practices do not document longitudinal characteristics of adverse effects, and alternative methods are not easily interpretable and have not been employed by clinical trials. Introducing time parameters in the evaluation of safety that are comprehensive yet easily interpretable could allow for a better understanding of treatment quality. In this study, we developed and applied a novel adverse event reporting method based on longitudinal adverse event changes to aid describing, summarizing, and presenting adverse event profile. We termed it the "Adverse Event Load, Onset, and Maximum Grade" method. METHODS: We developed two adverse event summary metrics to complement the traditional maximum grade report. Onset time indicates the time period in which the maximum grade for a specific adverse event occurred and was defined as "early" (i.e. maximum grade happened for the first time before 6 weeks) or "late" (i.e. after the 6th week). Adverse event load indicates the overall severity of a specific adverse event over the entire treatment. Higher adverse event load indicates a worse overall experience. These metrics can be calculated for adverse events with different maximum grades, in treatments with planned changes (e.g. dosage changes), using data sets with different number of adverse event data points between treatments (e.g. treatments with longer cycle lengths may have less adverse event data points) and on data sets with different adverse event data availability (e.g. cycle basis and patient-outcome reports). We tested the utility of this method using individual patient data from two major backbone therapies ("Irinotecan" and "Oxaliplatin") from the N9741 trial available in the Fondation ARCAD database (fondationarcad.org). We investigated profiles of diarrhea, neutropenia/leukopenia, and nausea/vomiting. RESULTS: Our method provided additional information compared to traditional adverse event reports. For example, for nausea/vomiting, while patients in Irinotecan had a higher risk of experiencing maximum grade 3-4 (15.6% vs 7.6%, respectively; p < 0.001), patients in both groups experienced similar severity over time (adverse effect load = 0.102 and 0.096, respectively; p = 0.26), suggesting that patients in Oxaliplatin experienced a lower-grade but more persistent nausea/vomiting. For neutropenia/leukopenia, more patients in Irinotecan experienced their maximum grade for the first time early in the treatment compared to patients in Oxaliplatin (67.9% vs 41.7%; p < 0.001), regardless of maximum grade. Longitudinal information can help compare treatments or guide clinicians on choosing appropriate interventions for low-grade but persistent adverse event or early adverse event onset. CONCLUSION: We developed an adverse event reporting method that provides clinically relevant information about treatment toxicity by incorporating two longitudinal adverse event metrics to the traditional maximum grade approach. Future research should establish clinical benchmarks for metrics included in this adverse event reporting method.

The McCAVE Trial: Vanucizumab plus mFOLFOX-6 Versus Bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX-6 in Patients with Previously Untreated Metastatic Colorectal Carcinoma (mCRC).

BACKGROUND: Bevacizumab, a VEGF-A inhibitor, in combination with chemotherapy, has proven to increase progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival in multiple lines of therapy of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The angiogenic factor angiopoetin-2 (Ang-2) is associated with poor prognosis in many cancers, including mCRC. Preclinical models demonstrate improved activity when inhibiting both VEGF-A and Ang-2, suggesting that the dual VEGF-A and Ang-2 blocker vanucizumab (RO5520985 or RG-7221) may improve clinical outcomes. This phase II trial evaluated the efficacy of vanucizumab plus modified (m)FOLFOX-6 (folinic acid (leucovorin), fluorouracil (5-FU) and oxaliplatin) versus bevacizumab/mFOLFOX-6 for first-line mCRC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All patients received mFOLFOX-6 and were randomized 1:1 to also receive vanucizumab 2,000 mg or bevacizumab 5 mg/kg every other week. Oxaliplatin was given for eight cycles; other agents were continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity for a maximum of 24 months. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed PFS. RESULTS: One hundred eighty-nine patients were randomized (vanucizumab, n = 94; bevacizumab, n = 95). The number of PFS events was comparable (vanucizumab, n = 39; bevacizumab, n = 43). The hazard ratio was 1.00 (95% confidence interval, 0.64-1.58; p = .98) in a stratified analysis based on number of metastatic sites and region. Objective response rate was 52.1% and 57.9% in the vanucizumab and bevacizumab arm, respectively. Baseline plasma Ang-2 levels were prognostic in both arms but not predictive for treatment effects on PFS of vanucizumab. The incidence of adverse events of grade ≥3 was similar between treatment arms (83.9% vs. 82.1%); gastrointestinal perforations (10.8% vs. 8.4%) exceeded previously reported rates in this setting. Hypertension and peripheral edema were more frequent in the vanucizumab arm. CONCLUSION: Vanucizumab/mFOLFOX-6 did not improve PFS and was associated with increased rates of antiangiogenic toxicity compared with bevacizumab/mFOLFOX-6. Our results suggest that Ang-2 is not a relevant therapeutic target in first-line mCRC. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This randomized phase II study demonstrates that additional angiopoietin-2 (Ang-2) inhibition does not result in superior benefit over anti-VEGF-A blockade alone when each added to standard chemotherapy. Moreover, the performed pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic analysis revealed that vanucizumab was bioavailable and affected its intended target, thereby strongly suggesting that Ang-2 is not a relevant therapeutic target in the clinical setting of treatment-naïve metastatic colorectal cancer. As a result, the further clinical development of the dual VEGF-A and Ang-2 inhibitor vanucizumab was discontinued.

Pertuzumab plus trastuzumab for HER2-amplified metastatic colorectal cancer (MyPathway): an updated report from a multicentre, open-label, phase 2a, multiple basket study.

BACKGROUND: Therapies targeting HER2 have improved clinical outcomes in HER2-positive breast and gastric cancers, and are emerging as potential treatments for HER2-positive metastatic colorectal cancer. MyPathway evaluates the activity of targeted therapies in non-indicated tumour types with potentially predictive molecular alterations. We aimed to assess the activity of pertuzumab and trastuzumab in patients with HER2-amplified metastatic colorectal cancer. METHODS: MyPathway is an ongoing, phase 2a, multiple basket study. Patients in this subset analysis were aged 18 years or older and had treatment-refractory, histologically confirmed HER2-amplified metastatic colorectal cancer with measurable or evaluable disease and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 2 or less, enrolled from 25 hospitals or clinics in 16 states of the USA. Patients received pertuzumab (840 mg loading dose, then 420 mg every 3 weeks, intravenously) and trastuzumab (8 mg/kg loading dose, then 6 mg/kg every 3 weeks, intravenously). The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who achieved an objective response based on investigator-reported tumour responses. Analyses were done per protocol. This ongoing trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02091141. FINDINGS: Between Oct 20, 2014, and June 22, 2017, 57 patients with HER2-amplified metastatic colorectal cancer were enrolled in the MyPathway study and deemed eligible for inclusionin this cohort analysis. Among these 57 evaluable patients, as of Aug 1, 2017, one (2%) patient had a complete response and 17 (30%) had partial responses; thus overall 18 of 57 patients achieved an objective response (32%, 95% CI 20-45). The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were diarrhoea (19 [33%] of 57 patients), fatigue (18 [32%] patients), and nausea (17 [30%] patients). Grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events were recorded in 21 (37%) of 57 patients, most commonly hypokalaemia and abdominal pain (each three [5%] patients). Serious treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in ten (18%) patients and two (4%) of these adverse events (ie, chills and infusion-related reaction) were considered treatment related. There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: Dual HER2-targeted therapy with pertuzumab plus trastuzumab is well tolerated and could represent a therapeutic opportunity for patients with heavily pretreated, HER2-amplified metastatic colorectal cancer. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech.

An initial genetic analysis of gemcitabine-induced high-grade neutropenia in pancreatic cancer patients in CALGB 80303 (Alliance).

OBJECTIVES: One of the standard of care regimens for advanced pancreatic cancer is gemcitabine-based chemotherapy. The efficacy of gemcitabine is limited by dose-limiting hematologic toxicities especially neutropenia. Uncovering the variability of these toxicities attributed to germline DNA variation is of great importance. PATIENTS AND METHODS: CALGB 80303 was a randomized study in advanced pancreatic cancer patients treated with gemcitabine with or without bevacizumab. The study protocol included genotyping of genes of gemcitabine disposition (CDA, DCTD, SLC29A1, SLC28A1, and SLC29A2), as well as a genome-wide analysis. The clinical phenotype was time to early high-grade neutropenia event accounting for progression or death or other treatment-terminating adverse events as competing for informative events. The inference was carried out on the basis of the association between genotype and cause-specific hazard of a neutropenic event. RESULTS: The primary analyses were carried out on the basis of 294 genetically estimated European pancreatic cancer patients. For CDA rs2072671 (A>C), AC and CC patients had a lower risk of neutropenia than AA patients (P=0.01, hazard ratio: 0.61, 95% confidence interval: 0.41-0.89). For SLC28A1 rs3825876 (G>A), AA patients have a higher risk of neutropenia than GA and GG patients (P=0.02, hazard ratio: 1.51, 95% confidence interval: 1.06-2.16). CDA rs2072671 was associated with increased mRNA expression in whole blood in three studies (P=2.7e-14, 6.61e-62, and 9.70e-65). In the genome-wide analysis, variants in TGFB2 were among the top hits (lowest P=1.62e-06) but had no effect in luciferase assays. CONCLUSION: This is the first genetic analysis of gemcitabine-induced neutropenia using a competing risk model in a prospective randomized clinical study has proposed a potentially novel mechanism of the protective effect of the CDA rs2072671 variant. Further confirmation is needed.

Phase II Randomized Trial of Sequential or Concurrent FOLFOXIRI-Bevacizumab Versus FOLFOX-Bevacizumab for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer (STEAM).

BACKGROUND: First-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) typically entails a biologic such as bevacizumab (BEV) with 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin/oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) or 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin/irinotecan (FOLFIRI). STEAM (NCT01765582) assessed the efficacy of BEV plus FOLFOX/FOLFIRI (FOLFOXIRI), administered concurrently (cFOLFOXIRI-BEV) or sequentially (sFOLFOXIRI-BEV, FOLFOX-BEV alternating with FOLFIRI-BEV), versus FOLFOX-BEV for mCRC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with previously untreated mCRC (n = 280) were randomized 1:1:1 to cFOLFOXIRI-BEV, sFOLFOXIRI-BEV, or FOLFOX-BEV and treated with 4-6-month induction followed by maintenance. Coprimary objectives were overall response rate (ORR; first-line cFOLFOXIRI-BEV vs. FOLFOX-BEV) and progression-free survival (PFS; pooled first-line cFOLFOXIRI-BEV and sFOLFOXIRI-BEV vs. FOLFOX-BEV). Secondary/exploratory objectives included overall survival (OS), liver resection rates, biomarker analyses, and safety. RESULTS: ORR was 72.0%, 72.8%, and 62.1% and median PFS was 11.9, 11.4, and 9.5 months with cFOLFOXIRI-BEV, sFOLFOXIRI-BEV, and FOLFOX-BEV, respectively. OS was similar between arms. ORR between cFOLFOXIRI-BEV and FOLFOX-BEV did not significantly differ (p = .132); thus, the primary ORR endpoint was not met. cFOLFOXIRI-BEV and sFOLFOXIRI-BEV numerically improved ORR and PFS, regardless of RAS status. Median PFS was higher with pooled concurrent and sequential FOLFOXIRI-BEV versus FOLFOX-BEV (11.7 vs. 9.5 months; hazard ratio, 0.7; 90% confidence interval, 0.5-0.9; p < .01). Liver resection rates were 17.2% (cFOLFOXIRI-BEV), 9.8% (sFOLFOXIRI-BEV), and 8.4% (FOLFOX-BEV). Grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were observed in 91.2% (cFOLFOXIRI-BEV), 86.7% (sFOLFOXIRI-BEV), and 85.6% (FOLFOX-BEV) of patients, with no increase in serious chemotherapy-associated TEAEs. CONCLUSION: cFOLFOXIRI-BEV and sFOLFOXIRI-BEV were well tolerated with numerically improved ORR, PFS, and liver resection rates versus FOLFOX-BEV, supporting triplet chemotherapy plus BEV as a first-line treatment option for mCRC. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The combination of first-line FOLFIRI with FOLFOX and bevacizumab (concurrent FOLFOXIRI-BEV) improves clinical outcomes in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) relative to FOLFIRI-BEV or FOLFOX-BEV, but it is thought to be associated with increased toxicity. Alternating treatment of FOLFOX and FOLFIRI (sequential FOLFOXIRI-BEV) could improve tolerability. In the phase II STEAM trial, which is the largest study of FOLFOXIRI-BEV in patients in the U.S., it was found that both concurrent and sequential FOLFOXIRI-BEV are active and well tolerated in patients with previously untreated mCRC, supporting the use of these regimens as potential first-line treatment options for this population.

A phase Ib study of capecitabine and ziv-aflibercept followed by a phase II single-arm expansion cohort in chemotherapy refractory metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients with chemotherapy refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) have a poor prognosis and limited therapeutic options. In this phase Ib/II clinical trial, we established the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase II dose (RPTD) for the combination of capecitabine and ziv-aflibercept, and then we evaluated the efficacy of the combination in patients with chemotherapy refractory metastatic CRC. METHODS: All patients were required to have a Karnofsky Performance Status > 70% and adequate organ function. The phase Ib dose escalation cohort included patients with advanced solid tumors who had progressed on all standard therapies. Using a standard 3 + 3 design, we identified the MTD and RPTD for the combination. Fifty patients with metastatic CRC who had progressed on or were intolerant of a fluoropyrimidine, oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and bevacizumab were then enrolled in a single-arm phase II expansion cohort, and were treated at the RPTD. Prior EGFR antibody therapy was required for subjects with RAS wildtype tumors. The primary endpoint for the expansion cohort was progression-free survival (PFS) at two months. Secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: A total of 63 patients were enrolled and evaluable for toxicity (13 dose escalation; 50 expansion). The MTD and RPTD were: capecitabine 850 mg/m2, P.O. bid, days 1-14, and ziv-aflibercept 6 mg/kg I.V., day 1, of each 21-day cycle. In the expansion cohort, 72% of patients were progression-free at two months (95% confidence interval [CI], 60-84%). Median PFS and OS were 3.9 months (95% CI, 2.3-4.5) and 7.1 months (95% CI: 5.8-10.0), respectively. Among all patients evaluable for toxicity, the most common treatment related adverse events (all grade [%]; grade ≥ 3 [%]) included palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (41%; 6%), hypertension (33%; 22%), and mucositis (19%; 5%). RNA was isolated from archived tumor specimens and gene expression analyses revealed no association between angiogenic biomarkers and clinical outcomes. CONCLUSION: The combination of capecitabine and ziv-aflibercept at the RPTD demonstrated acceptable safety and tolerability. PFS at 2 months in patients with chemotherapy refractory metastatic CRC was significantly greater than that in historical controls, indicating that this combination warrants further study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This clinical trial was registered in the www.clinicaltrials.gov system as NCT01661972 on July 31, 2012.

Genetic variants in the platelet-derived growth factor subunit B gene associated with pancreatic cancer risk.

The platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF) signaling pathway plays important roles in development and progression of human cancers. In our study, we aimed to identify genetic variants of the PDGF pathway genes associated with pancreatic cancer (PC) risk in European populations using three published genome-wide association study datasets, which consisted of 9,381 cases and 7,719 controls. The expression quantitative trait loci (eQTL) analysis was also performed using data from the 1000 Genomes, TCGA and GTEx projects. As a result, we identified two potential susceptibility loci (rs5757573 and rs6001516) of PDGFB associated with PC risk [odds ratio (OR) = 1.10, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.05-1.16, and p = 4.70 × 10-5 for the rs5757573 C allele and 1.21, 1.11-1.32, and 2.01 × 10-5 for the rs6001516 T allele]. Haplotype analysis revealed that the C-T haplotype carriers had a significantly increased risk of PC than those carrying the T-C haplotype (OR = 1.23, 95% CI = 1.12-1.34, p =5.00 × 10-6 ). The multivariate regression model incorporating the number of unfavorable genotypes (NUGs) with age and sex showed that carriers with 1-2 NUGs, particularly among 60-70 age group or males, had an increased risk of PC, compared to those without NUG. Furthermore, the eQTL analysis revealed that both loci were correlated with a decreased mRNA expression level of PDGFB in lymphoblastoid cell lines and pancreatic tumor tissues (p = 0.015 and 0.071, respectively). Our results suggest that genetic variants in PDGFB may play a role in susceptibility to PC. Further population and functional validations of our findings are warranted.

Impact of primary tumour location on efficacy of bevacizumab plus chemotherapy in metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Two first-line (1L) bevacizumab trials showed the prognostic value of primary tumour location in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). In this retrospective subgroup analysis, further analysis of the predictive effect of bevacizumab is presented. METHODS: Patients with sidedness information from two randomised phase III studies of bevacizumab + chemotherapy (CT) vs CT as 1L mCRC treatment were analysed retrospectively. RESULTS: Sidedness was determined in 1590 (27% right and 73% left) of 2214 patients. Progression-free survival was improved with bevacizumab + CT vs CT in right-sided (HR = 0.75; 95% CI 0.61, 0.93; p = 0.008) and left-sided (HR = 0.76; 95% CI 0.67, 0.86; p < 0.001) mCRC (pooled analysis). Similarly, overall survival was numerically improved with bevacizumab + CT vs CT in right-sided mCRC (HR = 0.82; 95% CI 0.65, 1.03; p = 0.085), and significantly improved in left-sided mCRC (HR = 0.85; 95% CI 0.74, 0.98; p = 0.028). CONCLUSIONS: This analysis indicates that the effect of bevacizumab is independent of tumour location in mCRC.

A phase 1 dose-escalation study of veliparib with bimonthly FOLFIRI in patients with advanced solid tumours.

BACKGROUND: Veliparib is a potent poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor. This phase 1 study aimed to establish the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of veliparib combined with various FOLFIRI regimens in patients with solid tumours. METHODS: Patients received veliparib (10-270 mg BID, days 1-5, 15-19) and FOLFIRI (days 1-3, 15-17) in three regimens containing 5-fluorouracil 2,400 mg/m2: irinotecan 150 mg/m2 and folinic acid 400 mg/m2 (part 1); irinotecan 180 mg/m2, folinic acid 400 mg/m2, and 5-fluorouracil 400 mg/m2 bolus (part 2), or irinotecan 180 mg/m2 (part 3). The RP2D was further evaluated in safety expansion cohorts. Preliminary antitumour activity was also assessed. RESULTS: Ninety-two patients received ≥1 veliparib dose. MTD was not reached; RP2D was set at 200 mg BID veliparib plus FOLFIRI (without 5-fluorouracil bolus). Most common treatment-emergent adverse events were neutropenia (66.3%), diarrhoea, and nausea (60.9% each). Dose-limiting toxicities (n = 4) were grade 3 gastritis and grade 4 neutropenia and febrile neutropenia. Veliparib exposure was dose-proportional, with no effects on the pharmacokinetics of FOLFIRI components. Fifteen patients had a partial response (objective response rate, 17.6%). CONCLUSIONS: The acceptable safety profile and preliminary antitumour activity of veliparib plus FOLFIRI support further evaluation of this combination.

A Phase I Trial of the IGF-1R Antibody Ganitumab (AMG 479) in Combination with Everolimus (RAD001) and Panitumumab in Patients with Advanced Cancer.

PURPOSE: This study evaluated the maximum tolerated dose or recommended phase II dose (RPTD) and safety and tolerability of the ganitumab and everolimus doublet regimen followed by the ganitumab, everolimus, and panitumumab triplet regimen. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a standard 3 + 3 dose escalation trial. Doublet therapy consisted of ganitumab at 12 mg/kg every 2 weeks; doses of everolimus were adjusted according to dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs). Panitumumab at 4.8 mg/kg every 2 weeks was added to the RPTD of ganitumab and everolimus. DLTs were assessed in cycle 1; toxicity evaluation was closely monitored throughout treatment. Treatment continued until disease progression or undesirable toxicity. Pretreatment and on-treatment skin biopsies were collected to assess insulin-like growth factor 1 receptor and mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) target modulation. RESULTS: Forty-three subjects were enrolled. In the doublet regimen, two DLTs were observed in cohort 1, no DLTs in cohort -1, and one in cohort -1B. The triplet combination was discontinued because of unacceptable toxicity. Common adverse events were thrombocytopenia/neutropenia, skin rash, mucositis, fatigue, and hyperglycemia. In the doublet regimen, two patients with refractory non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) achieved prolonged complete responses ranging from 18 to >60 months; one treatment-naïve patient with chondrosarcoma achieved prolonged stable disease >24 months. In dermal granulation tissue, the insulin-like growth factor receptor and mTOR pathways were potently and specifically inhibited by ganitumab and everolimus, respectively. CONCLUSION: The triplet regimen of ganitumab, everolimus, and panitumumab was associated with unacceptable toxicity. However, the doublet of ganitumab at 12 mg/kg every 2 weeks and everolimus five times weekly had an acceptable safety profile and demonstrated notable clinical activity in patients with refractory NSCLC and sarcoma. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This trial evaluated the maximum tolerated dose or recommended phase II dose and safety and tolerability of the ganitumab and everolimus doublet regimen followed by the ganitumab, everolimus, and panitumumab triplet regimen. Although the triplet regimen of ganitumab, everolimus, and panitumumab was associated with unacceptable toxicity, the doublet of ganitumab at 12 mg/kg every 2 weeks and everolimus at five times weekly had an acceptable safety profile and demonstrated notable clinical activity in patients with refractory non-small cell lung cancer and sarcoma.

Ruxolitinib + capecitabine in advanced/metastatic pancreatic cancer after disease progression/intolerance to first-line therapy: JANUS 1 and 2 randomized phase III studies.

Background Ruxolitinib, a Janus kinase 1 (JAK1)/JAK2 inhibitor, plus capecitabine improved overall survival (OS) vs capecitabine in a subgroup analysis of patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer and systemic inflammation (C-reactive protein [CRP] >13 mg/dL) in the randomized phase II RECAP study. We report results from two randomized phase III studies, JANUS 1 (NCT02117479) and JANUS 2 (NCT02119663). Patients and Methods Adults with advanced/metastatic pancreatic cancer, one prior chemotherapy regimen and CRP >10 mg/L were randomized 1:1 (stratified by modified Glasgow Prognostic Score [1 vs 2] and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status [0/1 vs 2]) to 21-day cycles of ruxolitinib 15 mg twice daily plus capecitabine 2000 mg/m2/day (Days 1-14) or placebo plus capecitabine. The primary endpoint was OS. Results Both studies were terminated following a planned interim futility/efficacy analysis of JANUS 1. Overall, 321 and 86 patients were randomized in JANUS 1 (ruxolitinib: n = 161; placebo: n = 160) and JANUS 2 (ruxolitinib: n = 43; placebo: n = 43). There was no significant difference in OS or progression-free survival (PFS) between treatments in JANUS 1 (OS: hazard ratio [HR], 0.969, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.747-1.256; PFS: HR, 1.056; 95% CI, 0.827-1.348) or JANUS 2 (OS: HR, 1.584; 95% CI, 0.886-2.830; PFS: HR, 1.166; 95% CI, 0.687-1.978). The most common hematologic adverse event was anemia. No new safety signals with ruxolitinib or capecitabine were identified. Conclusions Ruxolitinib plus capecitabine was well tolerated in refractory pancreatic cancer patients; this combination did not improve survival.

Randomized Phase II Trial of Parsatuzumab (Anti-EGFL7) or Placebo in Combination with FOLFOX and Bevacizumab for First-Line Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

LESSONS LEARNED: These negative phase II results for parsatuzumab highlight the challenges of developing an agent intended to enhance the efficacy of vascular endothelial growth factor inhibition without the benefit of validated pharmacodynamic biomarkers or strong predictive biomarker hypotheses.Any further clinical development of anti-EGFL7 is likely to require new mechanistic insights and biomarker development for antiangiogenic agents. BACKGROUND: EGFL7 (epidermal growth factor-like domain 7) is a tumor-enriched vascular extracellular matrix protein that supports endothelial cell survival. This phase II trial evaluated the efficacy of parsatuzumab (also known as MEGF0444A), a humanized anti-EGFL7 IgG1 monoclonal antibody, in combination with modified FOLFOX6 (mFOLFOX6) (folinic acid, 5-fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin) bevacizumab in patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). METHODS: One-hundred twenty-seven patients were randomly assigned to parsatuzumab, 400 mg, or placebo, in combination with mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab, 5 mg/kg. Treatment cycles were repeated every 2 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity for a maximum of 24 months, with the exception of oxaliplatin, which was administered for up to 8 cycles. RESULTS: The progression-free survival (PFS) hazard ratio was 1.17 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71-1.93; p = .548). The median PFS was 12 months for the experimental arm versus 11.9 months for the control arm. The hazard ratio for overall survival was 0.97 (95% CI, 0.46-2.1; p = .943). The overall response rate was 59% in the parsatuzumab arm and 64% in the placebo arm. The adverse event profile was similar in both arms. CONCLUSIONS: There was no evidence of efficacy for the addition of parsatuzumab to the combination of bevacizumab and chemotherapy for first-line mCRC. The Oncologist 2017;22:375-e30.

Pilot Evaluation of Angiogenesis Signaling Factor Response after Transcatheter Arterial Embolization for Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Purpose To identify changes in a broad panel of circulating angiogenesis factors after bland transcatheter arterial embolization (TAE), a purely ischemic treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Materials and Methods This prospective HIPAA-compliant study was approved by the institutional review board. Informed written consent was obtained from all participants prior to entry into the study. Twenty-five patients (21 men; mean age, 61 years; range, 30-81 years) with Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System category 5 or biopsy-proven HCC and who were undergoing TAE were enrolled from October 15, 2014, through December 2, 2015. Nineteen plasma angiogenesis factors (angiopoietin 2; hepatocyte growth factor; platelet-derived growth factor AA and BB; placental growth factor; vascular endothelial growth factor A and D; vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 1, 2, and 3; osteopontin; transforming growth factor ß1 and ß2; thrombospondin 2; intercellular adhesion molecule 1; interleukin 6 [IL-6]; stromal cell-derived factor 1; tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinases 1; and vascular cell adhesion molecule 1 [VCAM-1]) were measured by using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays at 1 day, 2 weeks, and 5 weeks after TAE and were compared with baseline levels by using paired Wilcoxon tests. Tumor response was assessed according to modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (mRECIST). Angiogenesis factor levels were compared between responders and nonresponders by mRECIST criteria by using unpaired Wilcoxon tests. Results All procedures were technically successful with no complications. Fourteen angiogenesis factors showed statistically significant changes following TAE, but most changes were transient. IL-6 was upregulated only 1 day after the procedure, but showed the largest increases of any factor. Osteopontin and VCAM-1 demonstrated sustained upregulation at all time points following TAE. At 3-month follow-up imaging, 11 patients had responses to TAE (complete response, n = 6; partial response, n = 5) and 11 patients were nonresponders (stable disease, n = 9; progressive disease, n = 2). In nonresponders, the percent change in IL-6 on the day after TAE (P = .033) and the mean percent change in osteopontin after TAE (P = .024) were significantly greater compared with those of responders. Conclusion Multiple angiogenesis factors demonstrated significant upregulation after TAE. VCAM-1 and osteopontin demonstrated sustained upregulation, whereas the rest were transient. IL-6 and osteopontin correlated significantly with radiologic response after TAE. © RSNA, 2017.

Clinical outcomes of patients with advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumors: safety and efficacy in a worldwide treatment-use trial of sunitinib.

BACKGROUND: The objectives of this study were to provide sunitinib to patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) who were otherwise unable to obtain it and to collect broad safety and efficacy data from a large population of patients with advanced GIST after imatinib failure. (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00094029). METHODS: Imatinib-resistant/intolerant patients with advanced GIST received sunitinib on an initial dosing schedule of 50 mg daily in 6-week cycles (4 weeks on treatment, 2 weeks off treatment). Tumor assessment frequency was according to local practice, and response was assessed by investigators according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.0. Overall survival (OS) and safety were assessed regularly. Post hoc analyses evaluated different patterns of treatment management. RESULTS: At final data cutoff, 1124 patients comprised the intent-to-treat population, and 15% of these patients had a baseline Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≥2. The median treatment duration was 7.0 months. The median time to tumor progression was 8.3 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.0-9.4 months), the median OS was 16.6 months (95% CI, 14.9-18.0 months), and 36% of patients were alive at the time of analysis. Patients for whom the initial dosing schedule was modified exhibited longer median OS (23.5 months) than those who were treated strictly according to the initial dosing schedule (11.1 months). The most common treatment-related grade 3 and 4 adverse events were hand-foot syndrome (11%), fatigue (9%), neutropenia (8%), hypertension (7%), and thrombocytopenia (6%). Treatment-related adverse events associated with cardiac function (eg, congestive heart failure and myocardial infarction) were reported at frequencies of ≤1% each. CONCLUSIONS: This treatment-use study confirms the long-term safety and efficacy of sunitinib in a large international population of patients with advanced GIST after imatinib failure.

Treatment of palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (PPE) with topical sildenafil: a pilot study.

PURPOSE: Palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (PPE) is a common chemotherapy and anti-VEGF multi-kinase inhibitor class-related toxicity that often results in debilitating skin changes and often limits the use of active anti-cancer regimens. Mechanistic and anecdotal clinical evidence suggested that topical application of sildenafil cream may help reduce the severity of PPE. Therefore, we conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot study to evaluate the feasibility, safety and efficacy of topical sildenafil cream for the treatment of PPE. METHODS: Eligible subjects were required to have grade 1-3 PPE associated with either capecitabine or sunitinib. Subjects were randomized to receive 1 % topical sildenafil cream to the left extremities or right extremities and placebo cream on the opposite extremity. Two times per day, 0.5 mL of cream was applied to each affected hand/foot. The primary endpoint was improvement in PPE grading at any point on study. Clinical assessments were evaluated by NCI-CTC 4.0 grading and patient self-reported pain. RESULTS: Ten subjects were enrolled, nine were evaluable for safety and efficacy. Five of nine subjects reported some improvement in foot pain and three of eight subjects for hand pain improvement. One of these subjects noted specific improvement in tactile function. No treatment-related toxicities were observed. CONCLUSIONS: In this limited, single-center study, topical cream containing 1 % sildenafil is feasible to administer, is well-tolerated, and may mitigate PPE-related symptoms due to anti-cancer therapeutic agents. Further validation is necessary.

An open-label study to determine the maximum tolerated dose of the multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor CEP-11981 in patients with advanced cancer.

BACKGROUND: This phase I study evaluated the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of CEP-11981, an oral vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) tyrosine kinase inhibitor, in patients with advanced, relapsed, or refractory solid tumors. METHODS: Oral CEP-11981 dose escalations followed a modified Fibonacci sequence (from 3.0 to 4.2, 5.9, 11.8, 19.7, 29.6, 41.4, 55.0, 73.0, 97.4, and 126.6 mg/m(2)). The maximum-tolerated dose (MTD), dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), tumor response, and safety were evaluated. RESULTS: CEP-11981 was tolerated at doses between 3.0 and 97.4 mg/m(2). The MTD of CEP-11981 was determined to be 97.4 mg/m(2), with DLTs observed at the 126.6 mg/m(2) dose. The DLTs were grade 4 neutropenia in 1 patient and grade 3 T-wave inversion with chest heaviness and fatigue in 1 patient. All 3 events resolved on stopping CEP-11981. The most frequently reported adverse events of any grade were fatigue, nausea, diarrhea, decreased appetite, abdominal pain, back pain, vomiting, constipation, headache, dizziness, and dyspnea. Treatment-related grade 3/4 neutropenia was observed in the highest-dose cohorts (2 patients at 97.4 mg/m(2) and 1 patient at 126.6 mg/m(2)), indicating some off-target inhibition. VEGF inhibition was greatest in the higher-dose groups. Although no patient experienced complete or partial response, 44% patients achieved stable disease when measured at ≥ 6 weeks, which occurred more frequently in cohorts receiving ≥ 73.0 mg/m(2). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with recurrent or refractory solid tumors, disease stabilization was achieved. Despite acceptable tolerability of CEP-11981 at the MTD, further development by the sponsor has ceased.

Effects of the combination of TRC105 and bevacizumab on endothelial cell biology.

Endoglin, or CD105, is a cell membrane glycoprotein that is overexpressed on proliferating endothelial cells (EC), including those found in malignancies and choroidal neovascularization. Endoglin mediates the transition from quiescent endothelium, characterized by the relatively dominant state of Smad 2/3 phosphorylation, to active angiogenesis by preferentially phosphorylating Smad 1/5/8. The monoclonal antibody TRC105 binds endoglin with high avidity and is currently being tested in phase 1b and phase 2 clinical trials. In this report, we evaluated the effects of TRC105 on primary human umbilical vascular endothelial cells (HUVEC) as a single agent and in combination with bevacizumab. As single agents, both TRC105 and bevacizumab efficiently blocked HUVEC tube formation, and the combination of both agents achieved even greater levels of inhibition. We further assessed the effects of each drug on various aspects of HUVEC function. While bevacizumab was observed to inhibit HUVEC viability in nutrient-limited medium, TRC105 had little effect on HUVEC viability, either alone or in combination with bevacizumab. Additionally, both drugs inhibited HUVEC migration and induced apoptosis. At the molecular level, TRC105 treatment of HUVEC lead to decreased Smad 1/5/8 phosphorylation in response to BMP-9, a primary ligand for endoglin. Together, these results indicate that TRC105 acts as an effective anti-angiogenic agent alone and in combination with bevacizumab.

A phase I clinical trial of navitoclax, a targeted high-affinity Bcl-2 family inhibitor, in combination with gemcitabine in patients with solid tumors.

PURPOSE: To investigate the safety, optimal dosing, pharmacokinetics and clinical activity of a regimen of navitoclax (ABT-263) combined with gemcitabine in patients with solid tumors. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Patients with solid tumors for which gemcitabine was deemed an appropriate therapy were enrolled into one of two different dosing schedules (21-day dosing schedule: navitoclax administered orally on days 1-3 and 8-10,; and gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8; 28-day dosing schedule: navitoclax administrated orally on days 1-3, 8-10, and 15-17; and gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8 and 15). Navitoclax doses were escalated from 150 to 425 mg. An expanded safety cohort was conducted for the 21-day dosing schedule at the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of navitoclax. RESULTS: Forty-six patients were enrolled at three U.S. centers. The most common adverse events included: hematologic abnormalities (thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, and anemia), liver enzyme elevations (ALT and AST), and gastrointestinal disturbances (diarrhea, nausea, and vomiting). Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) observed in cycle 1 were grade 4 thrombocytopenia (2 patients), grade 4 neutropenia (1 patient), and grade 3 AST elevation (2 patients). The MTD of navitoclax was 325 mg co-administered with gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) for the 21-day schedule. No clinically significant pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions were observed. There were no objective responses. Stable disease, reported at the end of cycle 2, was the best response in 54 % of evaluable patients (n = 39). CONCLUSIONS: The combination of navitoclax 325 mg with gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) was generally well tolerated and exhibited a favorable safety profile in patients with advanced solid tumors.

Phase I study of dasatinib in combination with capecitabine, oxaliplatin and bevacizumab followed by an expanded cohort in previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer.

PURPOSE: Dasatinib inhibits src family kinases and has anti-angiogenic properties. We conducted a phase I study of dasatinib, capecitabine, oxaliplatin, and bevacizumab (CapeOx/bevacizumab), with an expansion cohort in metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). METHODS: Patients were enrolled in a dose escalation cohort to establish the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and the recommended phase II dose (RP2D). Using a "3 + 3" design, twelve patients with advanced solid tumors received dasatinib (50 mg twice daily or 70 mg daily), capecitabine (850 mg/m(2) twice daily, days 1-14), oxaliplatin (130 mg/m(2) on day 1) and bevacizumab (7.5 mg/kg on day1), every 3 weeks. Ten patients with previously untreated metastatic CRC were then enrolled in an expansion cohort. Activated src (src(act)) expression was measured by immunohistochemistry, using an antibody that selectively recognizes the active conformation of src (clone 28). RESULTS: Twenty-two patients were enrolled between June 2009 and May 2011. Two DLTs were observed in the 50 mg bid dasatinib cohort, and one DLT was observed in the 70 mg daily dasatinib cohort. The MTD and RP2D for dasatinib was 70 mg daily. The most common treatment-related adverse events were fatigue (20; 91 %) and diarrhea (18; 82 %). Biomarker analysis of src(act) expression demonstrated that the overall response rate (ORR) was 75 % (6/8) for patients with high src(act) expression (IHC ≥ 2), compared to 0 % (0/8) for patients with low srcact expression (IHC 0 or 1); (p = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: The RP2D of dasatinib is 70 mg daily in combination with CapeOx/bevacizumab. High levels of srcact expression may predict those patients most likely to benefit from dasatinib.