Lurbinectedin in patients with pretreated neuroendocrine tumours: Results from a phase II basket study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with neuroendocrine tumours (NETs) need alternative therapies after failure of first-line therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This phase II trial evaluated lurbinectedin, a selective inhibitor of oncogenic transcription, at 3.2 mg/m2 as a 1-h intravenous infusion every 3 weeks in 32 NETs patients treated in the second- or third-line setting. The primary efficacy endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) according to RECIST v1.1 assessed by the investigators. Secondary endpoints included duration of response (DoR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and safety. RESULTS: Two of 31 evaluable patients had confirmed partial responses (ORR = 6.5%; 95%CI, 0.8-21.4%). Median DoR was 4.7 months (95% CI, 4.0-5.4 months), median PFS was 1.4 months (95% CI, 1.2-3.0 months) and median OS was 7.4 months (95% CI, 3.4-16.2 months). Lurbinectedin showed an acceptable, predictable and manageable safety profile. The most common grade 3/4 toxicity was neutropenia (40.6%; grade 4, 12.4%; febrile neutropenia, 3.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Considering the exploratory aim of this trial that evaluated a heterogeneous population of NETs patients, and the signs of antitumour activity observed (two confirmed partial responses and seven long disease stabilisations), further development of lurbinectedin is warranted in a more selected NETs population. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Sponsor Study Code: PM1183-B-005-14. EudraCT number: 2014-003773-42. CLINICALTRIALS: gov reference: NCT02454972.

Epirubicin Plus Cyclophosphamide Followed by Docetaxel Versus Epirubicin Plus Docetaxel Followed by Capecitabine As Adjuvant Therapy for Node-Positive Early Breast Cancer: Results From the GEICAM/2003-10 Study.

PURPOSE: Capecitabine is an active drug in metastatic breast cancer (BC). GEICAM/2003-10 is an adjuvant trial to investigate the integration of capecitabine into a regimen of epirubicin and docetaxel for node-positive early BC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with operable node-positive BC (T1-3/N1-3) were eligible. After surgery, 1,384 patients were randomly assigned to receive epirubicin plus cyclophosphamide (EC; 90 and 600 mg/m(2), respectively, × four cycles), followed by docetaxel (100 mg/m(2) × four cycles; EC-T) or epirubicin plus docetaxel (ET; 90 and 75 mg/m(2), respectively, × four cycles), followed by capecitabine (1,250 mg/m(2) twice a day on days 1 to 14, × four cycles; ET-X); all regimens were given every 3 weeks. The primary end point was invasive disease-free survival. Secondary end points included safety (with an alopecia-specific study) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 6.6 years and 297 events, 86% of patients who received EC-T and 82% of those who received ET-X were invasive disease free at 5 years (hazard ratio, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.03 to 1.64; log-rank P = .03). The OS difference between arms was not statistically significant (hazard ratio, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.82 to 1.55; log-rank P = .46). The most frequent grade 3 to 4 adverse events in the EC-T versus ET-X arms were neutropenia (19% v 10%), with 7% febrile neutropenia across arms; fatigue (13% v 11%); diarrhea (3% v 11%); hand-foot syndrome (2% v 20%); mucositis (6% v 5%); vomiting (both, 5%); and myalgia (4.5% v 1%). Incomplete scalp hair recovery was more frequent in the EC-T than ET-X arm (30% v 14%), and patients who received EC-T wore wigs significantly longer than those who received ET-X (8.35 v 6.03 months). CONCLUSION: Invasive disease-free survival, but not OS, was significantly superior for patients with node-positive early BC who received the adjuvant standard schedule EC-T than for those who received the experimental ET-X regimen. Toxicity profiles differed substantially across arms.

Molecular predictors of efficacy of adjuvant weekly paclitaxel in early breast cancer.

UNLABELLED: Treatment with fluororacil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide followed by weekly paclitaxel (FEC-P) yielded superior disease-free survival than FEC in the adjuvant breast cancer trial GEICAM 9906. We evaluate molecular subtypes predictive of prognosis and paclitaxel response in this trial. Two molecular subtype classifications based on conventional immunohistochemical and fluorescent in situ hybridization determinations were used: #1: Four groups segregated according to the combination of hormone receptor (HR) and HER2 status; #2: Intrinsic subtype classification (Triple Negative (TN), HER2, Luminal B and Luminal A). RESULTS: Both subtype classifications yielded prognostic and predictive information. HR +/HER2- patients (and Luminal A patients) had a significantly better outcome than the other subgroups of patients. The superiority of FEC-P over FEC was clearly more marked in HR-/HER2- patients (TN patients), particularly in the subset with basal phenotype (TN and either EGFR+ or cytokeratins 5/6+). The Luminal A subtype also achieved a significant benefit with FEC-P. The molecular-defined subgroup of TN was clearly predictive of better response to treatment with FEC-P. Luminal A patients had the best prognosis and also have a better outcome with weekly paclitaxel.