A randomised phase II study of osimertinib and bevacizumab versus osimertinib alone as second-line targeted treatment in advanced NSCLC with confirmed EGFR and acquired T790M mutations: the European Thoracic Oncology Platform (ETOP 10-16) BOOSTER trial.

BACKGROUND: While osimertinib, a third-generation epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) is the standard treatment in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with sensitising EGFR and acquired T790M mutations, progression inevitably occurs. The angiogenic pathway is implicated in EGFR TKI resistance. PATIENTS AND METHODS: BOOSTER is an open-label randomised phase II trial investigating the efficacy and safety of combined osimertinib 80 mg daily and bevacizumab 15 mg/kg every 3 weeks, versus osimertinib alone, in patients with EGFR-mutant advanced NSCLC and acquired T790M mutations after failure on previous EGFR TKI therapy. Primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR) and adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: Between May 2017 and February 2019, 155 patients were randomised (combination: 78; osimertinib: 77). At data cut-off of 22 February 2021, median follow-up was 33.8 months [interquartile range (IQR): 26.5-37.6 months] and 129 (83.2%) PFS events were reported in the intention-to-treat population. There was no difference in median PFS between the combination [15.4 months; 95% confidence interval (CI) 9.2-18.0 months] and osimertinib arm (12.3 months; 95% CI 6.2-17.2 months; stratified log-rank P = 0.83), [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.96; 95% CI 0.68-1.37]. Median OS was 24.0 months (95% CI 17.8-32.1 months) in the combination arm and 24.3 months (95% CI 16.9-37.0 months) in the osimertinib arm (stratified log-rank P = 0.91), (HR = 1.03; 95% CI 0.67-1.56). Exploratory analysis revealed a significant interaction of smoking history with treatment for PFS (adjusted P = 0.0052) with a HR of 0.52 (95% CI 0.30-0.90) for smokers, and 1.47 (95% CI 0.92-2.33) for never smokers. ORR was 55% in both arms and the median time to treatment failure was significantly shorter in the combination than in the osimertinib arm, 8.2 months versus 10.8 months, respectively (P = 0.0074). Safety of osimertinib and bevacizumab was consistent with previous reports with grade ≥3 treatment-related AEs (TRAEs) reported in 47% and 18% of patients on combination and osimertinib alone, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: No difference in PFS was observed between osimertinib plus bevacizumab and osimertinib alone. Grade ≥3 TRAEs were more common in patients on combination.

Ultra-selection of metastatic colorectal cancer patients using next-generation sequencing to improve clinical efficacy of anti-EGFR therapy.

BACKGROUND: Extended RAS analysis is mandatory in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. The optimal threshold of RAS mutated subclones to identify patients most likely to benefit from antiepidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) therapy is controversial. Our aim was to assess the clinical impact of detecting mutations in RAS, BRAF, PIK3CA and EGFRS492R in basal tissue tumour samples by using a highly sensitive next-generation sequencing (NGS) technology in mCRC patients treated with chemotherapy plus anti-EGFR or anti-vascular endothelial growth factor. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Five hundred and eighty-one tumour samples from untreated mCRC patients from 7 clinical studies were collected. Mutational analysis was carried out by standard-of-care (therascreen pyro) with a sensitivity detection of 5% mutant allele fraction (MAF), and compared with NGS technology using 454GS Junior platform (Roche Applied Science, Germany) with a sensitivity of 1%. Molecular results were correlated with clinical outcomes. RESULTS: After quality assessment, 380 samples were evaluable for molecular analysis. Standard-of-care mutational analysis detected RAS, BRAFV600E or PIK3CA mutations in 56.05% of samples compared with 69.21% by NGS (P = 0.00018). NGS identified coexistence of multiple low-frequency mutant alleles in 96 of the 263 mutated cases (36.5%; range 2-7). Response rate (RR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were increasingly improved in patients with RAS wild-type, RAS/BRAF wild-type or quadruple (KRAS/NRAS/BRAF/PIK3CA) wild-type tumours treated with anti-EGFR, assessed by standard-of-care. No additional benefit in RR, PFS or OS was observed by increasing the detection threshold to 1% by NGS. An inverse correlation between the MAF of the most prevalent mutation detected by NGS and anti-EGFR response was observed (P = 0.039). EGFRS492Rmutation was not detected in untreated samples. CONCLUSIONS: No improvement in the selection of patients for anti-EGFR therapy was obtained by adjusting the mutation detection threshold in tissue samples from 5% to 1% MAF. Response to anti-EGFR was significantly better in patients with quadruple wild-type tumours.

First-line single-agent regorafenib in frail patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a pilot phase II study of the Spanish Cooperative Group for the Treatment of Digestive Tumours (TTD).

BACKGROUND: Treatment of frail patients with advanced colorectal cancer (CRC) is controversial. This pilot phase II trial aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of regorafenib when administered in first-line to frail patients with advanced CRC. METHODS: Frail patients without prior advanced colorectal cancer treatment were included in the study. Definition of frailty was defined per protocol based on dependency criteria, presence of chronic comorbid pathologies and/or geriatric features. MAIN OBJECTIVE: to assess progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 6 months. Treatment consisted of 28-day cycles of orally administered regorafenib 160 mg/day (3 weeks followed by 1 week rest). RESULTS: Forty-seven patients were included in the study. Median age was 81 years (range 63-89). Frailty criteria: dependency was observed in 26 patients (55%), comorbidities in 27 (57%) and geriatric features in 18 (38%). PFS rate at 6 months was 45% (95% confidence interval [CI] 30-60]. Median PFS was 5.6 months (95%CI 2.7-8.4). Median overall survival (OS) was 16 months (95%CI 7.8-24). Complete response, partial response and stable disease were observed in one, two and 21 patients respectively (objective response rate 6.4%; disease control rate 51%). Thirty-nine patients (83%) experienced grade 3-4 adverse events (AEs). The most common grade 3-4 AEs were hypertension (15 patients; 32%), asthenia (14; 30%), hypophosphatemia (6; 13%); diarrhea (4; 8%), hand-foot-skin reaction (4; 8%). There were two toxic deaths (4.2%) (grade 5 rectal bleeding and death not further specified). Dose reduction was required in 26 patients (55%) and dose-delays in 13 patients (28%). CONCLUSIONS: The study did not meet the pre-specified boundary of 55% PFS rate at 6 months. Toxicity observed (83% patients experienced grade 3 and 4 AEs) preclude its current use in clinical practice on this setting. Disease control rate and overall survival results are interesting and might warrant further investigation to identify those who benefit from this approach. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was prospectively registered at EudraCT ( 2013-000236-94 ). Date of trial registration: April 9th, 2013.

Genotype-based selection of treatment of patients with advanced colorectal cancer (SETICC): a pharmacogenetic-based randomized phase II trial.

Background: There has been little progress toward personalized therapy for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). TYMS-3' untranslated region (UTR) 6 bp ins/del and ERCC1-118C/T polymorphisms were previously reported to facilitate selecting patients for fluoropyrimidine-based treatment in combination with oxaliplatin as first-line therapy. We assessed the utility of these markers in selecting therapy for patients with mCRC. Patients and methods: This randomized, open-label phase II trial compared bevacizumab plus XELOX (control) versus treatment tailored according to TYMS-3'UTR 6 bp ins/del and ERCC1-118C/T polymorphisms. Patients randomized to the experimental treatment received bevacizumab plus FUOX, FUIRI, XELIRI, or XELOX depending on their combination of favorable polymorphisms for FUOX treatment (TYMS-3'UTR ins/del or del/del; ERCC1-118T/T). Progression-free survival (PFS) was the primary end point. Results: Overall, 195 patients were randomized (control n = 65; experimental n = 130). The primary objective was not met: median PFS was 9.4 months in the control group and 10.1 months in the experimental group (P = 0.745). Median overall survival was similar in both groups (16.5 versus 19.1 months, respectively; P = 0.797). Patients in the experimental group had a significantly higher overall response rate (ORR; 65% versus 47% in the control group; P = 0.042) and R0 resection rate (86% versus 44%, respectively; P = 0.018). Neuropathy, hand-foot syndrome, thrombocytopenia, and dysesthesia were significantly less common in the experimental group. Conclusions: This study did not show survival benefits after treatment personalization based on polymorphisms in mCRC. However, the improved ORR and R0 resection rate and fewer disabling toxicities suggest that tailoring therapy by TYMS-3'UTR and ERCC1-118 polymorphisms warrants further investigation in patients with mCRC. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01071655.

Chemoradiation, surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy versus induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation and surgery: long-term results of the Spanish GCR-3 phase II randomized trial†.

BACKGROUND: The primary results of our phase II randomized trial suggested that compared with conventional preoperative chemoradiation (CRT), the addition of chemotherapy (CT) before CRT and surgery allows most patients receive their planned treatment with a better toxicity profile without compromising the pathological complete response and complete resection rates. We now report the 5-year outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with distal or middle third, T3-T4 and/or N+ rectal adenocarcinoma selected by magnetic resonance imaging, were randomly assigned to arm A-preoperative CRT followed by surgery and four cycles of postoperative adjuvant capecitabine and oxaliplatin (CAPOX)-or arm B-four cycles of CAPOX followed by CRT and surgery. The following 5-year actuarial outcomes were assessed: the cumulative incidence of local relapse (LR) and distant metastases (DM), disease-free (DFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: A total of 108 eligible patients were randomly assigned to arm A (n = 52) or arm B (n = 56). With a median follow-up of 69.5 months, 5-year DFS was 64% in arm A and 62% in arm B (P = 0.85) and 5-year OS was 78% in arm A and 75% in arm B (P = 0.64). The 5-year cumulative incidence of LR was 2% and 5% (P = 0.61) and 5-year cumulative incidence of DM was 21% and 23%; (P = 0.79) in arms A and B, respectively. CONCLUSION: Both treatment approaches yield similar outcomes. Given the lower acute toxicity and improved compliance with induction CT compared with adjuvant CT, integrating effective systemic therapy before CRT and surgery is a promising strategy and should be examined in phase III trials.

Docetaxel plus oxaliplatin with or without fluorouracil or capecitabine in metastatic or locally recurrent gastric cancer: a randomized phase II study.

BACKGROUND: Docetaxel/cisplatin/infusional 5-fluorouracil (5-FU; DCF) is a standard chemotherapy regimen for patients with advanced gastric cancer (GC). This phase II study evaluated docetaxel/oxaliplatin (TE), docetaxel/oxaliplatin/5-FU (TEF), and docetaxel/oxaliplatin/capecitabine (TEX) in patients with advanced GC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with metastatic or locally recurrent gastric adenocarcinoma (including carcinoma of the gastro-oesophageal junction) were randomly assigned (1 : 1 : 1) to TE, TEF, or TEX. Each regimen was tested at two doses before full evaluation at optimized dose levels. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Overall survival (OS), tumour response, and safety were also assessed. A therapeutic index (median PFS relative to the incidence of febrile neutropenia) was calculated for each regimen and compared with DCF (historical data). RESULTS: Overall, 248 patients were randomly assigned to receive optimized dose treatment. Median PFS was longer with TEF (7.66 [95% confidence interval (CI): 6.97-9.40] months) versus TE (4.50 [3.68-5.32] months) and TEX (5.55 [4.30-6.37] months). Median OS was 14.59 (95% CI: 11.70-21.78) months for TEF versus 8.97 (7.79-10.87) months for TE and 11.30 (8.08-14.03) months for TEX. The rate of tumour response (complete or partial) was 46.6% (95% CI 35.9-57.5) for TEF versus 23.1% (14.3-34.0) for TE and 25.6% (16.6-36.4) for TEX. The frequency and type of adverse events (AEs) were similar across the three arms. Common grade 3/4 AEs were fatigue (21%), sensory neuropathy (14%), and diarrhoea (13%). Febrile neutropenia was reported in 2% (TEF), 14% (TE), and 9% (TEX) of patients. The therapeutic index was improved with TEF versus TEX, TE, or DCF. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that TEF is worthy of evaluation as an arm in a phase III trial or as a backbone regimen for new targeted agents in advanced GC. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV: Identifier Trial registration number: NCT00382720.

Two biomarker-directed randomized trials in European and Chinese patients with nonsmall-cell lung cancer: the BRCA1-RAP80 Expression Customization (BREC) studies.

BACKGROUND: In a Spanish Lung Cancer Group (SLCG) phase II trial, the combination of BRCA1 and receptor-associated protein 80 (RAP80) expression was significantly associated with outcome in Caucasian patients with nonsmall-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The SLCG therefore undertook an industry-independent collaborative randomized phase III trial comparing nonselected cisplatin-based chemotherapy with therapy customized according to BRCA1/RAP80 expression. An analogous randomized phase II trial was carried out in China under the auspices of the SLCG to evaluate the effect of BRCA1/RAP80 expression in Asian patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligibility criteria included stage IIIB-IV NSCLC and sufficient tumor specimen for molecular analysis. Randomization to the control or experimental arm was 1 : 1 in the SLCG trial and 1 : 3 in the Chinese trial. In both trials, patients in the control arm received docetaxel/cisplatin; in the experimental arm, patients with low RAP80 expression received gemcitabine/cisplatin, those with intermediate/high RAP80 expression and low/intermediate BRCA1 expression received docetaxel/cisplatin, and those with intermediate/high RAP80 expression and high BRCA1 expression received docetaxel alone. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: Two hundred and seventy-nine patients in the SLCG trial and 124 in the Chinese trial were assessable for PFS. PFS in the control and experimental arms in the SLCG trial was 5.49 and 4.38 months, respectively [log rank P = 0.07; hazard ratio (HR) 1.28; P = 0.03]. In the Chinese trial, PFS was 4.74 and 3.78 months, respectively (log rank P = 0.82; HR 0.95; P = 0.82). CONCLUSION: Accrual was prematurely closed on the SLCG trial due to the absence of clinical benefit in the experimental over the control arm. However, the BREC studies provide proof of concept that an international, nonindustry, biomarker-directed trial is feasible. Thanks to the groundwork laid by these studies, we expect that ongoing further research on alternative biomarkers to elucidate DNA repair mechanisms will help define novel therapeutic approaches. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00617656/GECP-BREC and ChiCTR-TRC-12001860/BREC-CHINA.

Overall survival and central nervous system activity of crizotinib in ROS1-rearranged lung cancer-final results of the EUCROSS trial.

BACKGROUND: In 2019, we reported the first efficacy and safety analysis of EUCROSS, a phase II trial investigating crizotinib in ROS1 fusion-positive lung cancer. At that time, overall survival (OS) was immature and the effect of crizotinib on intracranial disease control remained unclear. Here, we present the final analysis of OS, systemic and intracranial activity, and the impact of co-occurring aberrations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: EUCROSS was a prospective, single-arm, phase II trial. The primary endpoint was best overall response rate (ORR) using RECIST 1.1. Secondary and exploratory endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), OS, and efficacy in pre-defined subgroups. RESULTS: Median OS of the intention-to-treat population (N = 34) was 54.8 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 20.3 months-not reached (NR); median follow-up 81.4 months] and median all-cause PFS of the response-evaluable population (N = 30) was 19.4 months (95% CI 10.1-32.2 months). Time on treatment was significantly correlated with OS (R = 0.82; P < 0.0001). Patients with co-occurring TP53 aberrations (28%) had a significantly shorter OS [hazard ratio (HR) 11; 95% CI 2.0-56.0; P = 0.006] and all-cause PFS (HR 4.2; 95% CI 1.2-15; P = 0.025). Patients with central nervous system (CNS) involvement at baseline (N = 6; 20%) had a numerically shorter median OS and all-cause PFS. Median intracranial PFS was 32.2 months (95% CI 23.7 months-NR) and the rate of isolated CNS progression was 24%. CONCLUSIONS: Our final analysis proves the efficacy of crizotinib in ROS1-positive lung cancer, but also highlights the devastating impact of TP53 mutations on survival and treatment efficacy. Additionally, our data show that CNS disease control is durable and the risk of CNS progression while on crizotinib treatment is low.

Brain metastases from lung cancer responding to erlotinib: the importance of EGFR mutation.

Median survival of patients with brain metastases from nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is poor and more effective treatments are urgently needed. We have evaluated the efficacy of erlotinib in this setting and its association with activating mutations in the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) gene. We retrospectively identified patients with NSCLC and brain metastases treated with erlotinib. EGFR mutations in exons 19 and 21 were analysed by direct sequencing. Efficacy and tolerability were compared according to EGFR mutational status. 69 NSCLC patients with brain metastases were identified, 17 of whom harboured EGFR mutations. Objective response rate in patients with EGFR mutations was 82.4%; no responses were observed in unselected patients (p<0.001). Median (95% CI) time to progression within the brain for patients harbouring EGFR mutations was 11.7 (7.9-15.5) months, compared to 5.8 (5.2-6.4) months for control patients whose EGFR mutational status had not been assessed (p<0.05). Overall survival was 12.9 (6.2-19.7) months and 3.1 (2.5-3.9) months (p<0.001), respectively. The toxicity of erlotinib was as expected and no differences between cohorts were observed. Erlotinib is active in brain metastases from NSCLC; this clinical benefit is related to the presence of activating mutations in exons 19 or 21 of the EGFR gene.

UGT1A and TYMS genetic variants predict toxicity and response of colorectal cancer patients treated with first-line irinotecan and fluorouracil combination therapy.

BACKGROUND: The impact of thymidylate synthase (TYMS) and UDP-glucoronosyltransferase 1A (UGT1A) germline polymorphisms on the outcome of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients treated with irinotecan plus 5-fluorouracil (irinotecan/5FU) is still controversial. Our objective was to define a genetic-based algorithm to select patients to be treated with irinotecan/5FU. METHODS: Genotyping of TYMS (5'TRP and 3'UTR), UGT1A1(*)28, UGT1A9(*)22 and UGT1A7(*)3 was performed in 149 metastatic CRC patients treated with irinotecan/5FU as first-line chemotherapy enrolled in a randomised phase 3 study. Their association with response, toxicity and survival was investigated by univariate and multivariate statistical analysis. RESULTS: TYMS 3TRP/3TRP genotype was the only independent predictor of tumour response (OR=5.87, 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.68-20.45; P=0.005). UGT1A1(*)28/(*)28 was predictive for haematologic toxicity (OR=6.27, 95% CI=1.09-36.12; P=0.04), specifically for neutropenia alone (OR=6.40, 95% CI=1.11-37.03; P=0.038) or together with diarrhoea (OR=18.87, 95% CI=2.14-166.67; P=0.008). UGT1A9(*)1/(*)1 was associated with non-haematologic toxicity (OR=2.70, 95% CI=1.07-6.82; P=0.035). Haplotype VII (all non-favourable alleles) was associated with non-haematologic toxicity (OR=2.11, 95% CI=1.12-3.98; P=0.02). CONCLUSION: TYMS and UGT1A polymorphisms influence on tumour response and toxicities derived from irinotecan/5FU treatment in CRC patients. A genetic-based algorithm to optimise treatment individualisation is proposed.

Expression of molecular markers in mediastinal nodes from resected stage I non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC): prognostic impact and potential role as markers of occult micrometastases.

BACKGROUND: Occult lymph node (LN) metastases are clinically relevant and confer a worse prognosis in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. Current staging methods are unable to identify patients with poor outcome. Their detection requires both a more sensitive and specific technique. We aimed to assess the role of messenger RNA expression in pathologically negative LNs (pN0) of stage I NSCLC patients as markers of occult micrometastases and to correlate the results with local or distant tumor recurrence and survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Potential molecular markers were evaluated in 344 LNs and 38 tumors by quantitative real-time RT-PCR. Only CEACAM5 and PLUNC showed high expression in lung tumor tissue and null expression in RNA from benign LNs. RESULTS: Thirteen per cent of the LNs were positive for CEACAM5 and 16% for PLUNC. Eight of 38 NSCLC patients had positive expression in pN2 nodes by CEACAM5 and/or PLUNC and disease-free survival (P=0.028) and overall survival time was significantly worse in these patients compared with those with negative expression (P=0.0083). CONCLUSIONS: Quantitative real-time RT-PCR of CEACAM5 and PLUNC can estimate the presence of micrometastatic cells in LNs with greater precision than current staging method used for assessing tumor recurrence risk.

Long-term survival in advanced non-squamous NSCLC patients treated with first-line bevacizumab-based therapy.

BACKGROUND/AIM: First-line bevacizumab-based therapies have been shown to improve clinical outcomes in patients with non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We aimed to descriptively analyse patients with non-squamous NSCLC who received a long-term period of maintenance bevacizumab. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective study included 104 patients who had already reached a progression-free survival (PFS) of at least 9 months. RESULTS: Median overall survival and PFS were 30.7 and 15.1 months, respectively. The overall response rate was 83 %. Weight loss ≤5 %, ECOG PS = 0, or low number of metastatic sites seem to be predictive factors of good evolution. The incidence of bevacizumab-related adverse events appeared to be similar as the previous studies. CONCLUSION: Our findings show that there is a long-term survivor group whom the administration of bevacizumab resulted in a relevant prolongation of response without new safety signals. Due to the population heterogeneity, it was not possible to identify the standardised predictive factors.

Pharmacogenomics and gemcitabine.

Approximately half of lung cancer patients present with metastases, and a large proportion will develop recurrent disease, with median survival to cisplatin-based chemotherapy of 11 months. No predictive factor of response to cisplatin-based chemotherapy is yet available in clinical practice. The nucleotide excision repair system plays a major role in repairing a variety of distorting lesions, notably platinum-induced DNA adducts. ERCC1 is a leading gene in repairing cisplatin DNA damage. We carried out three different studies examining individually the role of ERCC1, RRM1, and then both, mRNA expression in paraffin-embedded pretreatment bronchial biopsies from gemcitabine/cisplatin-treated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. Median survival was significantly prolonged in patients with low levels of ERCC1 or RRM1. BRCA1 is involved in homologous recombination repair, and we observed that low levels of BRCA1 mRNA significantly increased survival in gemcitabine/cisplatin-treated patients. Our observations lead us to recommend that tumors be regularly assessed for ERCC1 and BRCA1 mRNA expression in order to customize gemcitabine/cisplatin treatment.

Phase II trial of paclitaxel plus gemcitabine in patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: Given the cisplatin-related myelotoxicity and nonhematologic toxicities, we were prompted to undertake a study of the noncisplatin combination of paclitaxel plus gemcitabine to evaluate the efficacy, tolerance, and survival of this combination in patients with locally advanced and metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients received gemcitabine 2,000 mg/m(2) and paclitaxel 150 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 15 of a 28-day cycle, for a maximum of eight cycles. RESULTS: Between December 1997 and June 1998, 89 untreated NSCLC patients were enrolled; 30 (34%) had stage IIIB disease (23 with malignant pleural effusion and seven without), and 59 (66%) had stage IV disease. Eighty-six percent of patients had a performance status of 0 or 1. The median number of cycles administered was four (range, one to eight cycles). The mean dose-intensity for both paclitaxel and gemcitabine was nearly 100%. Hematologic and nonhematologic toxicities were mild. Thirty-eight patients received second-line chemotherapy after completion of the study. The overall intent-to-treat response rate was 32.2%, with a higher response rate for stage IIIB patients (43.3%) than for stage IV patients (26.3%). Overall median survival was 9.9 months, and 1-year survival was 38.8% (14.2 months for stage IIIB and 7.7 months for stage IV; P =.007). Median survival was 10.2 months for patients with a performance status of 0 or 1 and 4.8 months for patients with a performance status of 2 (P =.007). CONCLUSION: A biweekly paclitaxel/gemcitabine regimen was well tolerated, with an acceptable response rate and a reasonable median survival time, especially in patients with good performance status. It merits further exploration in future studies.

Randomized phase III study of gemcitabine-cisplatin versus etoposide-cisplatin in the treatment of locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: We conducted a randomized trial to compare gemcitabine-cisplatin with etoposide-cisplatin in the treatment of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The primary end point of the comparison was response rate. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 135 chemotherapy-naive patients with advanced NSCLC were randomized to receive either gemcitabine 1,250 mg/m2 intravenously (IV) days 1 and 8 or etoposide 100 mg/m2 IV days 1 to 3 along with cisplatin 100 mg/m2 IV day 1. Both treatments were administered in 21-day cycles. One hundred thirty-three patients were included in the intent-to-treat analysis of response. RESULTS: The response rate (externally validated) for patients given gemcitabine-cisplatin was superior to that for patients given etoposide-cisplatin (40.6% v 21.9%; P = .02). This superior response rate was associated with a significant delay in time to disease progression (6.9 months v 4.3 months; P = .01) without an impairment in quality of life (QOL). There was no statistically significant difference in survival time between both arms (8.7 months for gemcitabine-cisplatin v 7.2 months for etoposide-cisplatin; P = .18). The overall toxicity profile for both combinations of drugs was similar. Nausea and vomiting were reported more frequently in the gemcitabine arm than in the etoposide arm. However, the difference was not significant. Gemcitabine-cisplatin produced less grade 3 alopecia (13% v 51%) and less grade 4 neutropenia (28% v 56% ) but more grade 3 and 4 thrombocytopenia (56% v 13%) than did etoposide-cisplatin. However, there were no thrombocytopenia-related complications in the gemcitabine arm. CONCLUSION: Compared with etoposide-cisplatin, gemcitabine-cisplatin provides a significantly higher response rate and a delay in disease progression without impairing QOL in patients with advanced NSCLC.

Circulating HER2 extracellular domain and resistance to chemotherapy in advanced breast cancer.

To test the hypothesis of an association between HER2 and chemotherapy resistance, we performed a prospective assessment of the predictive value of the circulating HER2 extracellular domain (ECD) in patients with advanced breast carcinoma in the setting of a multicenter Phase II trial using paclitaxel and doxorubicin. Serum samples were collected from 58 patients with metastatic breast carcinoma before first-line chemotherapy for advanced disease, and the levels of circulating HER2 ECD were measured using an enzyme immunoassay. Immunohistochemistry with anti-HER2 monoclonal antibody CB11 was used to assess the overexpression of HER2 in the primary tumors. When 450 fmol/ml was used as a cutoff, 24 cases (41%) had elevated HER2 ECD levels. Elevated levels of circulating HER2 ECD were associated with the expression of HER2 in the primary tumor tissue and with the metastatic tumor burden (evaluated with the marker CA 15-3; P = 0.032 and P = 0.002, respectively) but not with variables such as menopausal status, stage at diagnosis, previous adjuvant therapy, or the number of metastatic sites. The levels of circulating HER2 ECD correlated inversely with the response to treatment. The probability of obtaining a complete response to chemotherapy was significantly lower (P = 0.021) in patients with elevated HER2 ECD levels (0%; 95% confidence interval, 0-13%) compared with patients with nonelevated HER2 (26%; 95% confidence interval, 12-45%). In addition, the duration of clinical response was significantly shorter in patients with elevated HER2 ECD, compared with the cases with nonelevated HER2 (7.5 versus 11 months; P = 0.035). In conclusion, elevated levels of circulating HER2 ECD in patients with metastatic breast cancer correlate with reduced efficacy of a paclitaxel-doxorubicin chemotherapy combination. We suggest that the poor response rate associated with HER2 expression in advanced breast cancer may not be reversed by aggressive chemotherapy alone.

Superiority of sequential versus concurrent administration of paclitaxel with etoposide in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: comparison of two Phase II trials.

Paclitaxel and etoposide are two chemotherapy agents with broad cytotoxic activity and different mechanisms of action and resistance. Preclinical studies of their combined cytotoxicity have yielded conflicting results. We performed two sequential Phase II trials using different sequence schedules of paclitaxel and etoposide as first-line treatment in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Forty-four patients with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC were included between July 1995 and September 1996. All patients received etoposide at 100 mg/m2, given as an i.v. infusion on days 1, 2, and 3. The first 20 patients (part A) also received paclitaxel at 175 mg/m2 as a 3-h infusion on day 1, immediately prior to etoposide. The subsequent 24 patients (part B) were given the same paclitaxel dose, but on day 4. Grade 3-4 granulocytopenia was seen in 70% of the patients in part A and in 37% of those in part B (P = 0.04). Twenty-five % of the courses in part A and 4% of the courses in part B were associated with granulocyte nadir < or =500/microl (P = 0.00006). No responses were observed in part A, although disease was stabilized in 14 patients (70%). In part B, there were two complete responses and seven partial responses, for an overall response rate of 37.5% (95% confidence interval, 21-58%). In conclusion, toxicity and antitumor activity of the paclitaxel/etoposide combination may be sequence dependent. Our findings suggest that etoposide followed by paclitaxel is well tolerated and has greater activity in NSCLC than concurrent administration.

SEOM clinical guidelines for the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) 2015.

Lung cancer is the most common cancer worldwide as well as the leading cause of cancer related deaths as reported by Torre et al (CA Cancer J Clin 65:87-108, 2015]. Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) accounts for up to 85 % of all lung cancers. Multiple advances in the staging, diagnostic procedures, therapeutic options, as well as molecular knowledge have been achieved during the past years, although the overall outlook has not greatly changed for the majority of patients with the overall 5-year survival having marginally increased over the last decade from 15.7 to 17.4 % as reported by Howlader et al. (SEER Cancer Statistics Review 2015).

First-line single-agent panitumumab in frail elderly patients with wild-type KRAS metastatic colorectal cancer and poor prognostic factors: A phase II study of the Spanish Cooperative Group for the Treatment of Digestive Tumours.

BACKGROUND: Frail elderly patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) are not candidates for chemotherapy. Monotherapy with anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) monoclonal antibodies may be an option for these patients with few systemic toxic effects. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Single-arm, multicentre, phase II trial including patients ⩾ 70y ears with wild-type (WT) KRAS (exon 2) mCRC, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) status ⩽ 3, KPC (Köhne Prognostic Classification)--defined intermediate or high risk status, frailty and/or ineligibility for chemotherapy. Patients received panitumumab until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end-point was progression free survival (PFS) rate at 6 months. RESULTS: The study included 33 patients (intention-to-treat (ITT) population). Median age: 81 years; sex: 66.7% male; high-risk KPC status: 45.4%. Median treatment duration was 14 weeks and 6-month PFS rate was 36.4% (95% confidence interval (CI): 20.0-52.8). The objective response rate: 9.1% (95% CI: 0-18.9) (all partial responses), and there were 18 stable diseases (54.5%). Median PFS was 4.3 months (95% CI: 2.8-6.4) and median overall survival (OS) was 7.1 months (95% CI: 5.0-12.3). There were no deaths or grade 4-5 adverse events (AEs) related to panitumumab and the most common grade 3-related AE was rash acneiform (15.2%). A significant association between clinical response and RAS status was observed (P=0.037). In the WT RAS subgroup (WT exons 2, 3, and 4 of KRAS and NRAS, N = 15), 6-month PFS rate was 53.3% (95% CI: 30.1-75.2) and median PFS and OS were 7.9 and 12.3 months, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Single-agent panitumumab is active and well tolerated and may be a therapeutic option for high-risk frail elderly patients with WT RAS tumours considered not candidates for chemotherapy (clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT01126112).

Phase II trial of miniDOX (reduced dose docetaxel-oxaliplatin-capecitabine) in "suboptimal" patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC). TTD 08-02.

PURPOSE: Chemotherapy has improved the overall survival (OS) in patients (pts) with advanced gastric cancer (AGC). Docetaxel (D), oxaliplatin (O) and capecitabine (C) have shown interesting activity in this setting. We defined "suboptimal" pts as those with PS ECOG = 2, weight loss 10-25% and/or age ≥70 years. This population is usually underrepresented in AGC clinical trials. METHODS: We explored in 43 previously untreated "suboptimal" AGC pts the effect of "miniDOX" regimen (D: 40 mg/m(2) iv, day 1; O: 80 mg/m(2) iv, day 1; C: 625 mg/m(2) po bid, day 1 to day 21, every 21 days; after six courses, only C was maintained). Primary end point was response rate (RR), and secondary end points were adverse events (AE), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Patients characteristics: PS ECOG = 2: 12 pts; weight loss 10-25%: 23 pts; median age 73.3 years (range 40-87; 28 pts were ≥70 years); 32 males; locally advanced: 8 pts/metastatic: 35 pts; primary site: gastric 32 pts/EGJ 11. Worst AE per pt (grade 3-4): neutropenia: 5 pts (febrile neutropenia: 3); pulmonary embolism (PE): 4 pts (3 of them suffered sudden death); diarrhea: 9 pts; paronychia: 2 pts; ictus: 1 pt; renal failure: 1 pt (this pt suffered infection/bacteriemia without neutropenia and died); hand-foot syndrome: 4 pts and asthenia: 5 pts. RESPONSE: CR: 1 pt, PR: 23 pts (RR: 56%), SD: 12 pts, progression: 3 pts, no determined: 4 pts. Median and 1 year actuarial PFS and OS were 5.5 months/18% and 13.3 months/52%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Although miniDOX's toxicity (mainly PE)has been important, its activity has been promising in "suboptimal" pts with AGC, and this combination should be further investigated in this setting.