A phase I study of the Wee1 kinase inhibitor adavosertib (AZD1775) in combination with chemoradiation in cervical, upper vaginal, and uterine cancers.

OBJECTIVE: Wee1 kinase is a crucial regulator of the G2/M checkpoint which prevents entry of damaged DNA into mitosis. Adavosertib (AZD1775), a selective inhibitor of Wee1, induces G2 escape and increases cytotoxicity when combined with DNA damaging agents. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of adavosertib in combination with definitive pelvic radiotherapy and concurrent cisplatin in patients with gynecological cancers. METHODS: A multi-institutional, open-label phase I trial was designed to assess dose escalation (3+3 design) of adavosertib in combination with standard chemoradiation. Eligible patients with locally advanced cervical, endometrial or vaginal tumors were treated with a 5-week course of pelvic external beam radiation 45-50 Gy in 1.8-2 Gy daily fractions plus concurrent weekly cisplatin 40 mg/m2 and adavosertib 100 mg/m2 on days 1, 3 and 5 of each week during chemoradiation. The primary endpoint was to determine the recommended phase II dose of adavosertib. Secondary endpoints included toxicity profile and preliminary efficacy. RESULTS: Ten patients were enrolled (nine locally advanced cervical and one endometrial cancer). Two patients experienced a dose-limiting toxicity at dose level 1 (adavosertib 100 mg by mouth daily on days 1, 3 and 5), including one patient with grade 4 thrombocytopenia, and one with treatment hold >1 week due to grade 1 creatinine elevation and grade 1 thrombocytopenia. At dose level -1 (adavosertib 100 mg by mouth daily on days 3 and 5), one out of five patients enrolled had a dose-limiting toxicity in the form of persistent grade 3 diarrhea. The overall response rate at 4 months was 71.4%, including four complete responses. At 2 years follow-up, 86% of patients were alive and progression-free. CONCLUSION: The recommended phase II dose could not be determined due to clinical toxicity and early trial closure. Preliminary efficacy appears promising, yet selecting the adequate dose/schedule in combination chemoradiation warrants further investigation to limit overlapping toxicities.

Avelumab alone or in combination with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in platinum-resistant or platinum-refractory ovarian cancer (JAVELIN Ovarian 200): an open-label, three-arm, randomised, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Most patients with ovarian cancer will relapse after receiving frontline platinum-based chemotherapy and eventually develop platinum-resistant or platinum-refractory disease. We report results of avelumab alone or avelumab plus pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) compared with PLD alone in patients with platinum-resistant or platinum-refractory ovarian cancer. METHODS: JAVELIN Ovarian 200 was an open-label, parallel-group, three-arm, randomised, phase 3 trial, done at 149 hospitals and cancer treatment centres in 24 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or peritoneal cancer (maximum of three previous lines for platinum-sensitive disease, none for platinum-resistant disease) and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) via interactive response technology to avelumab (10 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks), avelumab plus PLD (40 mg/m2 intravenously every 4 weeks), or PLD and stratified by disease platinum status, number of previous anticancer regimens, and bulky disease. Primary endpoints were progression-free survival by blinded independent central review and overall survival in all randomly assigned patients, with the objective to show whether avelumab alone or avelumab plus PLD is superior to PLD. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02580058. The trial is no longer enrolling patients and this is the final analysis of both primary endpoints. FINDINGS: Between Jan 5, 2016, and May 16, 2017, 566 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned (combination n=188; PLD n=190, avelumab n=188). At data cutoff (Sept 19, 2018), median duration of follow-up for overall survival was 18·4 months (IQR 15·6-21·9) for the combination group, 17·4 months (15·2-21·3) for the PLD group, and 18·2 months (15·8-21·2) for the avelumab group. Median progression-free survival by blinded independent central review was 3·7 months (95% CI 3·3-5·1) in the combination group, 3·5 months (2·1-4·0) in the PLD group, and 1·9 months (1·8-1·9) in the avelumab group (combination vs PLD: stratified HR 0·78 [repeated 93·1% CI 0·59-1·24], one-sided p=0·030; avelumab vs PLD: 1·68 [1·32-2·60], one-sided p>0·99). Median overall survival was 15·7 months (95% CI 12·7-18·7) in the combination group, 13·1 months (11·8-15·5) in the PLD group, and 11·8 months (8·9-14·1) in the avelumab group (combination vs PLD: stratified HR 0·89 [repeated 88·85% CI 0·74-1·24], one-sided p=0·21; avelumab vs PLD: 1·14 [0·95-1·58], one-sided p=0·83]). The most common grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events were palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome (18 [10%] in the combination group vs nine [5%] in the PLD group vs none in the avelumab group), rash (11 [6%] vs three [2%] vs none), fatigue (ten [5%] vs three [2%] vs none), stomatitis (ten [5%] vs five [3%] vs none), anaemia (six [3%] vs nine [5%] vs three [2%]), neutropenia (nine [5%] vs nine [5%] vs none), and neutrophil count decreased (eight [5%] vs seven [4%] vs none). Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 32 (18%) patients in the combination group, 19 (11%) in the PLD group, and 14 (7%) in the avelumab group. Treatment-related adverse events resulted in death in one patient each in the PLD group (sepsis) and avelumab group (intestinal obstruction). INTERPRETATION: Neither avelumab plus PLD nor avelumab alone significantly improved progression-free survival or overall survival versus PLD. These results provide insights for patient selection in future studies of immune checkpoint inhibitors in platinum-resistant or platinum-refractory ovarian cancer. FUNDING: Pfizer and Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany.

Dynamic modeling in ovarian cancer: an original approach linking early changes in modeled longitudinal CA-125 kinetics and survival to help decisions in early drug development.

OBJECTIVE: Early prediction of the expected benefit of treatment in recurrent ovarian cancer (ROC) patients may help in drug development decisions. The actual value of 50% CA-125 decrease is being reconsidered. The main objective of the present study was to quantify the links between longitudinal assessments of CA-125 kinetics and progression-free survival (PFS) in treated recurrent ovarian cancer (ROC) patients. METHODS: The CALYPSO randomized phase III trial database comparing two platinum-based regimens in ROC patients was randomly split into a "learning dataset" and a "validation dataset". A parametric survival model was developed to associate longitudinal modeled CA-125 changes (ΔCA125), predictive factors, and PFS. The predictive performance of the model was evaluated with simulations. RESULTS: The PFS of 534 ROC patients were properly characterized by a parametric mathematical model. The modeled ΔCA125 from baseline to week 6 was a better predictor of PFS than the modeled fractional change in tumor size. Simulations confirmed the model's predictive performance. CONCLUSIONS: We present the first parametric survival model quantifying the relationship between PFS and longitudinal CA-125 kinetics in treated ROC patients. The model enabled calculation of the increase in ΔCA125 required to observe a predetermined benefit in PFS to compare therapeutic strategies in populations. Therefore, ΔCA125 may be a predictive marker of the expected gain in PFS and an early predictive tool in drug development decisions.

A Randomized Phase II Trial of Epigenetic Priming with Guadecitabine and Carboplatin in Platinum-resistant, Recurrent Ovarian Cancer.

PURPOSE: Platinum resistance in ovarian cancer is associated with epigenetic modifications. Hypomethylating agents (HMA) have been studied as carboplatin resensitizing agents in ovarian cancer. This randomized phase II trial compared guadecitabine, a second-generation HMA, and carboplatin (G+C) against second-line chemotherapy in women with measurable or detectable platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients received either G+C (guadecitabine 30 mg/m2 s.c. once-daily for 5 days and carboplatin) or treatment of choice (TC; topotecan, pegylated liposomal doxorubicin, paclitaxel, or gemcitabine) in 28-day cycles until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary endpoints were RECIST v1.1 and CA-125 response rate, 6-month PFS, and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Of 100 patients treated, 51 received G+C and 49 received TC, of which 27 crossed over to G+C. The study did not meet its primary endpoint as the median PFS was not statistically different between arms (16.3 weeks vs. 9.1 weeks in the G+C and TC groups, respectively; P = 0.07). However, the 6-month PFS rate was significantly higher in the G+C group (37% vs. 11% in TC group; P = 0.003). The incidence of grade 3 or higher toxicity was similar in G+C and TC groups (51% and 49%, respectively), with neutropenia and leukopenia being more frequent in the G+C group. CONCLUSIONS: Although this trial did not show superiority for PFS of G+C versus TC, the 6-month PFS increased in G+C treated patients. Further refinement of this strategy should focus on identification of predictive markers for patient selection.

MILO/ENGOT-ov11: Binimetinib Versus Physician's Choice Chemotherapy in Recurrent or Persistent Low-Grade Serous Carcinomas of the Ovary, Fallopian Tube, or Primary Peritoneum.

PURPOSE: Low-grade serous ovarian carcinomas (LGSOCs) have historically low chemotherapy responses. Alterations affecting the MAPK pathway, most commonly KRAS/BRAF, are present in 30%-60% of LGSOCs. The purpose of this study was to evaluate binimetinib, a potent MEK1/2 inhibitor with demonstrated activity across multiple cancers, in LGSOC. METHODS: This was a 2:1 randomized study of binimetinib (45 mg twice daily) versus physician's choice chemotherapy (PCC). Eligible patients had recurrent measurable LGSOC after ≥ 1 prior platinum-based chemotherapy but ≤ 3 prior chemotherapy lines. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) by blinded independent central review (BICR); additional assessments included overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), duration of response (DOR), clinical-benefit rate, biomarkers, and safety. RESULTS: A total of 303 patients were randomly assigned to an arm of the study at the time of interim analysis (January 20, 2016). Median PFS by BICR was 9.1 months (95% CI, 7.3 to 11.3) for binimetinib and 10.6 months (95% CI, 9.2 to 14.5) for PCC (hazard ratio,1.21; 95%CI, 0.79 to 1.86), resulting in early study closure according to a prespecified futility boundary after 341 patients had enrolled. Secondary efficacy end points were similar in the two groups: ORR 16% (complete response [CR]/partial responses[PRs], 32) versus 13% (CR/PRs, 13); median DOR, 8.1 months (range, 0.03 to ≥ 12.0 months) versus 6.7 months (0.03 to ≥ 9.7 months); and median OS, 25.3 versus 20.8 months for binimetinib and PCC, respectively. Safety results were consistent with the known safety profile of binimetinib; the most common grade ≥ 3 event was increased blood creatine kinase level (26%). Post hoc analysis suggests a possible association between KRAS mutation and response to binimetinib. Results from an updated analysis (n = 341; January 2019) were consistent. CONCLUSION: Although the MEK Inhibitor in Low-Grade Serous Ovarian Cancer Study did not meet its primary end point, binimetinib showed activity in LGSOC across the efficacy end points evaluated. A higher response to chemotherapy than expected was observed and KRAS mutation might predict response to binimetinib.

Efficacy of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) plus carboplatin in ovarian cancer patients who recur within six to twelve months: a phase II study.

OBJECTIVES: Pegylated liposomal doxorubicin is one of the preferred alternatives for ovarian cancer patients with early relapse (<6 months) and taxane/carboplatin for late relapse (>12 months), but the optimal therapy for the partially platinum-sensitive (6-12 months) population has not been defined. This single-arm phase II trial was designed to assess the efficacy of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD)/carboplatin in ovarian cancer patients who relapse between 6 and 12 months after initial treatment with platinum-based chemotherapy. METHODS: Ovarian cancer patients who previously completed a course of therapy with paclitaxel/carboplatin were administered PLD 30 mg/m(2) followed by carboplatin AUC 5 mg/mL/minute every 4 weeks. RESULTS: Fifty-eight patients were enrolled in the study and 54 were eligible for the efficacy analysis, of whom most (75%) received at least 6 cycles of PLD/carboplatin. The objective response rate was 46% (4% CR and 42% PR), with an additional 33% experiencing disease stabilization >6 months. For those patients with measurable CA-125, the response rate was 66% (28% CR and 38% PR), with an additional 18% experiencing disease stabilization >6 months. Median time-to-progression was 10 months (1.5-25). Median overall survival was 19.1 months (2.2-38.9). The most frequent adverse effects were neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and constipation. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of PLD/carboplatin is efficacious and well tolerated in women with partially platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer and represents a valuable alternative for patients who relapse within 6-12 months of completing paclitaxel/carboplatin chemotherapy.

A prospective phase I-II trial of the cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor celecoxib in patients with carcinoma of the cervix with biomarker assessment of the tumor microenvironment.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the toxicity and effectiveness of celecoxib in combination with definitive chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in women with locally advanced cervical cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Thirty-one patients were accrued to a phase I-II trial of celecoxib 400 mg by mouth twice per day for 2 weeks before and during CRT. Tumor oxygenation (HP(5)) and interstitial fluid pressure (IFP) were measured before and 2 weeks after celecoxib administration alone. The median follow-up time was 2.7 years (range, 1.1-4.4 years). RESULTS: The most common acute G3/4 toxicities were hematologic (4/31, 12.9%) and gastrointestinal (5/31, 16.1%) largely attributed to chemotherapy. Late G3/4 toxicity was seen in 4 of 31 patients (13.7% actuarial risk at 2 yr), including fistulas in 3 patients (9.7%). Within the first year of follow-up, 25 of 31 patients (81%) achieved complete response (CR), of whom 20 remained in CR at last follow-up. After 2 weeks of celecoxib administration before CRT, the median IFP decreased slightly (median absolute, -4.6 mm Hg; p = 0.09; relative, -21%; p = 0.07), whereas HP(5) did not change significantly (absolute increase, 3.6%; p = 0.51; median relative increase, 11%; p = 0.27). No significant associations were seen between changes in HP(5) or IFP and response to treatment (p = 0.2, relative HP(5) change and p = 0.14, relative IFP change). CONCLUSIONS: Celecoxib in combination with definitive CRT is associated with acceptable acute toxicity, but higher than expected late complications. Celecoxib is associated with a modest reduction in the angiogenic biomarker IFP, but this does not correspond with tumor response.

ENGOT-ov-6/TRINOVA-2: Randomised, double-blind, phase 3 study of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin plus trebananib or placebo in women with recurrent partially platinum-sensitive or resistant ovarian cancer.

AIMS: Trebananib, a peptide-Fc fusion protein, inhibits angiogenesis by inhibiting binding of angiopoietin-1/2 to the receptor tyrosine kinase Tie2. This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 study evaluated whether trebananib plus pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) improved progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer. METHODS: Women with recurrent ovarian cancer (platinum-free interval ≤12 months) were randomised to intravenous PLD 50 mg/m2 once every 4 weeks plus weekly intravenous trebananib 15 mg/kg or placebo. PFS was the primary end-point; key secondary end-points were objective response rate (ORR) and duration of response (DOR). Owing to PLD shortages, enrolment was paused for 13 months; the study was subsequently truncated. RESULTS: Two hundred twenty-three patients were enrolled. Median PFS was 7.6 months (95% CI, 7.2-9.0) in the trebananib arm and 7.2 months (95% CI, 4.8-8.2) in the placebo arm, with a hazard ratio of 0.92 (95% CI, 0.68-1.24). However, because the proportional hazards assumption was not fulfilled, the standard Cox model did not provide a reliable estimate of the hazard ratio. ORR in the trebananib arm was 46% versus 21% in the placebo arm (odds ratio, 3.43; 95% CI, 1.78-6.64). Median DOR was improved (trebananib, 7.4 months [95% CI, 5.7-7.6]; placebo, 3.9 months [95% CI, 2.3-6.5]). Adverse events with a greater incidence in the trebananib arm included localised oedema (61% versus 32%), ascites (29% versus 9%) and vomiting (45% versus 33%). CONCLUSIONS: Trebananib demonstrated anticancer activity in this phase 3 study, indicated by improved ORR and DOR. Median PFS was not improved. No new safety signals were identified. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01281254.

Sucralfate mouthwash for prevention and treatment of 5-fluorouracil-induced mucositis: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of a sucralfate mouthwash in preventing and alleviating oral mucositis induced by 5-fluorouracil (5FU). A total of 81 patients with colorectal cancer were enrolled. Patients were studied during their first cycle of chemotherapy with 5FU and leucovorin (LV) daily for 5 days every 4 weeks (Mayo Clinic schedule). Patients were randomly allocated to receive either a sucralfate suspension or a placebo suspension that was identical in appearance. Patients were instructed to use the suspension as a mouthwash four times daily from the beginning of the chemotherapy cycle. All patients received oral cryotherapy. Patients graded the severity of their own symptoms on a daily basis, and this was the primary outcome measure. There was no difference in the frequency or severity of oral mucositis between the sucralfate- and the placebo-treated group. Some mucositis was reported by 79% of the patient group. Assessment of mucositis by trial staff underestimated the incidence of this problem. Results of this trial do not support the hypothesis that a sucralfate mouthwash can prevent or alleviate oral mucositis induced by 5FU. Patient reporting of mucositis is a more sensitive instrument for assessment of mucositis than review by medical staff.