Phase 1 trial of navitoclax and sorafenib in patients with relapsed or refractory solid tumors with hepatocellular carcinoma expansion cohort.

Navitoclax (ABT-263) is an oral BCL2 homology-3 mimetic that binds with high affinity to pro-survival BCL2 proteins, resulting in apoptosis. Sorafenib, an oral multi kinase inhibitor also promotes apoptosis and inhibits tumor angiogenesis. The efficacy of either agent alone is limited; however, preclinical studies demonstrate synergy with the combination of navitoclax and sorafenib. In this phase 1 study, we evaluated the combination of navitoclax and sorafenib in a dose escalation cohort of patients with refractory solid tumors, with an expansion cohort in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was determined using the continual reassessment method. Navitoclax and sorafenib were administered continuously on days 1 through 21 of 21-day cycles. Ten patients were enrolled in the dose escalation cohort and 15 HCC patients were enrolled in the expansion cohort. Two dose levels were tested, and the MTD was navitoclax 150 mg daily plus sorafenib 400 mg twice daily. Among all patients, the most common grade 3 toxicity was thrombocytopenia (5 patients, 20%): there were no grade 4 or 5 toxicities. Patients received a median of 2 cycles (range 1-36 cycles) and all patients were off study treatment at data cut off. Six patients in the expansion cohort had stable disease, and there were no partial or complete responses. Drug-drug interaction between navitoclax and sorafenib was not observed. The combination of navitoclax and sorafenib did not increase induction of apoptosis compared with navitoclax alone. Navitoclax plus sorafenib is tolerable but showed limited efficacy in the HCC expansion cohort. These findings do not support further development of this combination for the treatment of advanced HCC. This phase I trial was conducted under ClinicalTrials.gov registry number NCT01364051.

Unmet Needs in Oncology Clinical Research and Treatment in Africa: Focus on Ghana.

Cancer incidence is increasing worldwide and is a major cause of mortality. The relative magnitude of the increase is remarkably high in low human development index (HDI; 95%) and medium HDI (64%) countries. On the African continent, a corresponding increase in cancer burden is predicted, particularly for sub-Saharan Africa. Current epidemiologic data indicate that mortality rates of certain cancers, such as breast and cervical cancers, in sub-Saharan Africa are the highest in the world, and the cancer risks are broadly comparable to the risks in high-income countries, such as the United States and Europe. Although emerging data alludes to the unique genetic profile of cancer in African populations, most cancer therapies are introduced to Africa without confirmatory clinical trials. Therefore, there is an increasing need for clinical trials directed toward prevention, screening, diagnosis, and identification of innovative treatments in the African context. This review will discuss the increasing cancer burden in Africa, with a particular focus on Ghana, unmet clinical needs in cancer, current medical systems, clinical trial regulatory systems, and challenges to clinical trial recruitment.

A Phase II Study of Pazopanib in Patients with Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma: NCCTG N0623 (Alliance).

PURPOSE: Preclinical and clinical data have shown promise in using antiangiogenic agents to treat malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). We conducted this phase II study to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of single-agent pazopanib in patients with MPM. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with MPM who had received 0-1 prior chemotherapy regimens were eligible to receive pazopanib at a dose of 800 mg daily. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival rate at 6 months (PFS6), with a preplanned interim analysis for futility. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), PFS, adverse events assessment and clinical benefit (complete response, partial response [PR], and stable disease [SD]). RESULTS: Thirty-four evaluable patients were enrolled, with a median age of 73 years (49-84). The trial was closed early because of lack of efficacy at the preplanned interim analysis. Only 8 patients (28.6%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 13.2-48.7%) in the first 28 evaluable were progression-free at 6 months. PFS6 was 32.4% (95% CI, 17.4-50.5). There were 2 PR (5.9%) and 16 SD (47.1%). The overall median PFS and OS were 4.2 months (95% CI, 2.0-6.0) and 11.5 months (95% CI: 5.3-18.2), respectively. The median PFS and OS for the previously untreated patients was 5.4 months (95% CI, 2.7-8.5) and 16.6 months (95% CI, 6.6-30.6), respectively; and 2.0 months (95% CI, 1.3-4.2) and 5.0 months (95% CI: 3.0-11.9), respectively, for the previously treated patients. Grade 3 or higher adverse events were observed in 23 patients (67.6%). CONCLUSION: Single-agent pazopanib was poorly tolerated in patients with MPM. The primary endpoint of PFS6 was not achieved in the current study. ClinicalTrials.gov identification number. NCT00459862. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Single-agent pazopanib did not meet its endpoint in this phase II trial in malignant mesothelioma. Pazopanib is well tolerated in mesothelioma patients with a manageable toxicity profile. There is a need to better identify signals of angiogenesis that can be targeted in mesothelioma. Encouraging findings in frontline treatment warrant further investigations in combination with chemotherapy or immunotherapy.

Development and Reporting of Prediction Models: Guidance for Authors From Editors of Respiratory, Sleep, and Critical Care Journals.

Prediction models aim to use available data to predict a health state or outcome that has not yet been observed. Prediction is primarily relevant to clinical practice, but is also used in research, and administration. While prediction modeling involves estimating the relationship between patient factors and outcomes, it is distinct from casual inference. Prediction modeling thus requires unique considerations for development, validation, and updating. This document represents an effort from editors at 31 respiratory, sleep, and critical care medicine journals to consolidate contemporary best practices and recommendations related to prediction study design, conduct, and reporting. Herein, we address issues commonly encountered in submissions to our various journals. Key topics include considerations for selecting predictor variables, operationalizing variables, dealing with missing data, the importance of appropriate validation, model performance measures and their interpretation, and good reporting practices. Supplemental discussion covers emerging topics such as model fairness, competing risks, pitfalls of "modifiable risk factors", measurement error, and risk for bias. This guidance is not meant to be overly prescriptive; we acknowledge that every study is different, and no set of rules will fit all cases. Additional best practices can be found in the Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (TRIPOD) guidelines, to which we refer readers for further details.

A phase I study of the VEGFR kinase inhibitor vatalanib in combination with the mTOR inhibitor, everolimus, in patients with advanced solid tumors.

Purpose Combining small-molecule inhibitors of different targets was shown to be synergistic in preclinical studies. Testing this concept in clinical trials is, however, daunting due to challenges in toxicity management and efficacy assessment. This study attempted to evaluate the safety and efficacy of vatalanib plus everolimus in patients with advanced solid tumors and explore the utility of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) studies as a predictive biomarker. Patients and Methods This single-center, phase I trial containing 70 evaluable patients consisted of a dose escalation proportion based on the traditional "3 + 3" design (cohort IA and IB) and a dose expansion proportion (cohort IIA and IIB). Toxicity was evaluated using the Common Terminology Criteria of Adverse Events. Antitumor activity was assessed using the Modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. Results The maximum tolerated doses were determined to be vatalanib 1250 mg once daily or 750 mg twice daily in combination with everolimus 10 mg once daily. No treatment-related death occurred. The most common toxicities were hypertriglyceridemia, hypercholesterolemia, fatigue, vomiting, nausea and diarrhea. There was no complete response. Nine patients (12.9%) had partial response (PR) and 41 (58.6%) had stable disease (SD). Significant antitumor activity was observed in neuroendocrine tumors with a disease-control rate (PR + SD) of 66.7% and other tumor types including renal cancer, melanoma, and non-small-cell lung cancer. Conclusions The combination of vatalanib and everolimus demonstrated reasonable toxicity and clinical activity. Future studies combining targeted therapies and incorporating biomarker analysis are warranted based on this phase I trial.

Targeting of the Hedgehog/GLI and mTOR pathways in advanced pancreatic cancer, a phase 1 trial of Vismodegib and Sirolimus combination.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Preclinical data indicated a functional and molecular interaction between Hedgehog (HH)/GLI and PI3K-AKT-mTOR pathways promoting pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). A phase I study was conducted of Vismodegib and Sirolimus combination to evaluate maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and preliminary anti-tumor efficacy. METHODS: Cohort I included advanced solid tumors patients following a traditional 3 + 3 design. Vismodegib was orally administered at 150 mg daily with Sirolimus starting at 3 mg daily, increasing to 6 mg daily at dose level 2. Cohort II included only metastatic PDAC patients. Anti-tumor efficacy was evaluated every two cycles and target assessment at pre-treatment and after a single cycle. RESULTS: Nine patient were enrolled in cohort I and 22 patients in cohort II. Twenty-eight patients were evaluated for dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs). One DLT was observed in each cohort, consisting of grade 2 mucositis and grade 3 thrombocytopenia. The MTD for Vismodegib and Sirolimus were 150 mg daily and 6 mg daily, respectively. The most common grade 3-4 toxicities were fatigue, thrombocytopenia, dehydration, and infections. A total of 6 patients had stable disease. No partial or complete responses were observed. Paired biopsy analysis before and after the first cycle in cohort II consistently demonstrated reduced GLI1 expression. Conversely, GLI and mTOR downstream targets were not significantly affected. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of Vismodegib and Sirolimus was well tolerated. Clinical benefit was limited to stable disease in a subgroup of patients. Targeting efficacy demonstrated consistent partial decreases in HH/GLI signaling with limited impact on mTOR signaling. These findings conflict with pre-clinical models and warrant further investigations.

Understanding, recognizing, and managing toxicities of targeted anticancer therapies.

Answer questions and earn CME/CNE Advances in genomics and molecular biology have identified aberrant proteins in cancer cells that are attractive targets for cancer therapy. Because these proteins are overexpressed or dysregulated in cancer cells compared with normal cells, it was assumed that their inhibitors will be narrowly targeted and relatively nontoxic. However, this hope has not been achieved. Current targeted agents exhibit the same frequency and severity of toxicities as traditional cytotoxic agents, with the main difference being the nature of the toxic effects. Thus, the classical chemotherapy toxicities of alopecia, myelosuppression, mucositis, nausea, and vomiting have been generally replaced by vascular, dermatologic, endocrine, coagulation, immunologic, ocular, and pulmonary toxicities. These toxicities need to be recognized, prevented, and optimally managed.

5-year overall survival in patients with lung cancer eligible or ineligible for screening according to US Preventive Services Task Force criteria: a prospective, observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommends lung cancer screening among individuals aged 55-80 years with a 30 pack-year cigarette smoking history and, if they are former smokers, those who quit within the past 15 years. Our previous report found that two-thirds of newly diagnosed patients with lung cancer do not meet these criteria; they are reported to be either long-term quitters (≥15 years since quitting) or from a younger age group (age 50-54 years). We aimed to assess survival outcomes in these two subgroups. METHODS: For this prospective, observational cohort study we identified and followed up patients aged 50-80 years with lung cancer, with a smoking history of 30 pack-years or more, and included both current smokers and former smokers who quit within the past 30 years. We identified patients from two cohorts in the USA: a hospital cohort (Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN) and a community cohort (Olmsted County, MN). Patients were divided into those meeting USPSTF criteria (USPSTF group) versus those not meeting USPSTF criteria (long-term quitters or the younger age group). The main outcome was overall survival at 5 years after diagnosis. 5-year overall survival was analysed with and without matching age and pack-years smoked for long-term quitters. The USPSTF group was subdivided into two age subgroups (55-69 years and 70-80 years) for multivariable regression analysis. FINDINGS: Between Jan 1, 1997, and Dec 31, 2017, 8739 patients with lung cancer were identified and followed up. Median follow-up was 6·5 (IQR 3·8-10·0) years, and median overall survival was 16·9 months (95% CI 16·2-17·5). 5-year overall survival was 27% (95% CI 25-30) in long-term quitters, 22% (19-25) in the younger age group, and 23% (22-24) in the USPSTF group. In both cohorts, 5-year overall survival did not differ significantly between long-term quitters and the USPSTF group (hospital cohort: hazard ratio [HR] 1·02 [95% CI 0·94-1·10]; p=0·72; community cohort: 0·97 [0·75-1·26]; p=0·82); matched analysis showed similar results in both cohorts. 5-year overall survival also did not differ significantly between the younger age group and the USPSTF group in both cohorts (hospital cohort: HR 1·16 [95% CI 0·98-1·38], p=0·08; community cohort: 1·16 [0·74-1·82]; p=0·52); multivariable regression analyses stratified by age group yielded similar findings. INTERPRETATION: Patients with lung cancer who quit 15 or more years before diagnosis and those who are up to 5 years younger than the age cutoff recommended for screening, but otherwise meet USPSTF criteria, have a similar risk of death to those individuals who meet all USPSTF criteria. Individuals in both subgroups could benefit from screening, as expansion of USPSTF screening criteria to include these subgroups could enable earlier detection of lung cancer and improved survival outcomes. FUNDING: National Institutes of Health and the Mayo Clinic Foundation.

Sex Differences in Tolerability to Anti-Programmed Cell Death Protein 1 Therapy in Patients with Metastatic Melanoma and Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Are We All Equal?

BACKGROUND: Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) have emerged as a serious clinical issue in the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Risk factors for irAEs remain controversial. Therefore, we studied sex differences in irAEs in patients treated with anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients with metastatic melanoma and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with anti-PD-1 therapy at Mayo Clinic Rochester and Florida from 2015 to 2018 were reviewed. Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test was used for time-to-event analysis. RESULTS: In 245 patients with metastatic melanoma, premenopausal women were more likely to experience irAEs (all grades) compared with postmenopausal women and men (67% vs. 60% vs. 46%), primarily because of an increase in endocrinopathies (33% vs. 12% vs. 10%, respectively). In patients with NSCLC (231 patients), women (all ages) were also more likely to develop irAEs of all grades (48% vs. 31%). Women with NSCLC were more likely to develop pneumonitis (11% vs. 4%) and endocrinopathies (14% vs. 5%). No differences in grade ≥3 toxicities were seen across sexes in both cohorts, but women were more likely to receive systemic steroids for the treatment of irAEs compared with men. Better progression-free-survival was observed in women with NSCLC and irAEs (10 months vs. 3.3 months) compared with women without irAEs. CONCLUSION: Women with metastatic melanoma and NSCLC are more likely to experience irAEs compared with men. We also observed differences between sexes in the frequency of certain irAEs. Larger studies are needed to investigate the mechanisms underlying these associations. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The results of this study suggest that women may be at a higher risk for immune-related adverse events (irAEs) compared with men when treated with anti-programmed cell death protein 1 therapy. In addition, women were more likely to develop certain irAEs, including endocrinopathies and pneumonitis. Close follow-up of women undergoing treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors will allow clinicians to diagnose these treatment-related complications early, potentially reducing their associated morbidity and mortality. In addition, a possible association between irAEs and response to therapy was observed.

Characterization of Comorbidities Limiting the Recruitment of Patients in Early Phase Clinical Trials.

BACKGROUND: Early phase clinical trials evaluate the safety and efficacy of new treatments. The exclusion/inclusion criteria in these trials are usually rigorous and may exclude many patients seen in clinical practice. Our objective was to study the comorbidities limiting the participation of patients with breast, colorectal, or lung cancer in clinical trials. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We queried ClinicalTrials.gov on December 31, 2016. We reviewed the eligibility criteria of 1,103 trials. Logistic regression analyses were completed, and exclusion was studied as a binary variable. RESULTS: Out of 1,103 trials, 70 trials (6%) excluded patients >75 years of age, and 45% made no reference to age. Eighty-six percent of trials placed restrictions on patients with history of prior malignancies. Regarding central nervous system (CNS) metastasis, 416 trials (38%) excluded all patients with CNS metastasis, and 373 (34%) only allowed asymptomatic CNS metastasis. Regarding chronic viral infections, 347 trials (31%) excluded all patients with human immunodeficiency virus, and 228 trials (21%) excluded all patients with hepatitis B or C infection. On univariate analysis, chemotherapy trials were more likely to exclude patients with CNS metastasis and history of other malignancies than targeted therapy trials. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that industry-sponsored trials had higher odds of excluding patients with compromised liver function. CONCLUSION: Many clinical trials excluded large segments of the population of patients with cancer. Frequent exclusion criteria included patients with CNS metastasis, history of prior malignancies, and chronic viral infections. The criteria for participation in some clinical trials may be overly restrictive and limit enrollment. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The results of this study revealed that most early phase clinic trials contain strict exclusion criteria, potentially excluding the patients who may be more likely to represent the population treated in clinical settings, leaving patients susceptible to unintended harm from inappropriate generalization of trial results. Careful liberalization of the inclusion/exclusion criteria in clinical trials will allow investigators to understand the benefits and drawbacks of the experimental drug for a broader population, and possibly improve recruitment of patients with cancer into clinical trials.

A phase I study of the vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor Vatalanib in combination with Pemetrexed disodium in patients with advanced solid tumors.

Introduction Vatalanib is an oral receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor that blocks all known VEGF, PDGF, and c-Kit receptors. This phase I study evaluated the safety, tolerability, and biologic activity of the combination of vatalanib with pemetrexed disodium in patients with advanced solid tumors. Methods Patients were administered escalating twice daily doses of vatalanib in combination with pemetrexed disodium in 21-day cycles. A dose expansion cohort was enrolled to further define the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and further evaluate efficacy. Results A total of 29 patients were enrolled in the study (dose escalation, 9; dose expansion, 20). Dose-limiting toxicities included grade 4 thrombocytopenia (6.9%) and febrile neutropenia, anorexia, constipation, and dehydration. Other common adverse events were fatigue (75%), nausea (66%), vomiting (48%), oral mucositis (31%) and diarrhea (28%). The majority of these toxicities were Grade 1-2. The MTD was reached at vatalanib 250 mg twice daily continuously combined with pemetrexed disodium 500 mg/m2 day 1. Overall, 2 patients (6.9%) had partial responses, 8 (27.6%) had stable disease for at least 4 cycles, 5 had progressive disease (17.2%) and 5 went off study before disease assessment. Conclusion The combination of vatalanib with pemetrexed disodium was feasible, but not well tolerated. The modest efficacy results are consistent with other results obtained from combinations of chemotherapy and a large number of VEGF tyrosine kinase inhibitors. This combination should not be developed further unless predictive biomarkers can be identified.

A phase II study of the orally administered negative enantiomer of gossypol (AT-101), a BH3 mimetic, in patients with advanced adrenal cortical carcinoma.

Background Adrenal cortical carcinoma (ACC) is a rare cancer with treatment options of limited efficacy, and poor prognosis if metastatic. AT-101 is a more potent inhibitor of B cell lymphoma 2 family apoptosis-related proteins than its racemic form, gossypol, which showed preliminary clinical activity in ACC. We thus evaluated the efficacy of AT-101 in patients with advanced ACC. Methods Patients with histologically confirmed metastatic, recurrent, or primarily unresectable ACC were treated with AT-101 (20 mg/day orally, 21 days out of 28-day cycles) until disease progression and/or prohibitive toxicity. The primary endpoint was objective response rate, wherein a Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) partial response rate of 25% would be considered promising and 10% not, with a Type I error of 10% and 90% power. In a 2-stage design, 2 responses were required of the first 21 assessable subjects to warrant complete accrual of 44 patients. Secondary endpoints included safety, progression-free survival and overall survival. Results This study accrued 29 patients between 2009 and 2011; median number of cycles was 2. Seven percent experienced grade 4 toxicity including cardiac troponin elevations and hypokalemia. None of the first 21 patients attained RECIST partial response; accordingly, study therapy was deemed ineffective and the trial was permanently closed. Conclusions AT-101 had no meaningful clinical activity in this study in patients with advanced ACC, but demonstrated feasibility of prospective therapeutic clinical trials in this rare cancer.

Adjuvant chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab in patients with resected non-small-cell lung cancer (E1505): an open-label, multicentre, randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant chemotherapy for resected early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) provides a modest survival benefit. Bevacizumab, a monoclonal antibody directed against VEGF, improves outcomes when added to platinum-based chemotherapy in advanced-stage non-squamous NSCLC. We aimed to evaluate the addition of bevacizumab to adjuvant chemotherapy in early-stage resected NSCLC. METHODS: We did an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial of adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 and who had completely resected stage IB (≥4 cm) to IIIA (defined by the American Joint Committee on Cancer 6th edition) NSCLC. We enrolled patients from across the US National Clinical Trials Network, including patients from the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-American College of Radiology Imaging Network (ECOG-ACRIN) affiliates in Europe and from the Canadian Cancer Trials Group, within 6-12 weeks of surgery. The chemotherapy regimen for each patient was selected before randomisation and administered intravenously; it consisted of four 21-day cycles of cisplatin (75 mg/m2 on day 1 in all regimens) in combination with investigator's choice of vinorelbine (30 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8), docetaxel (75 mg/m2 on day 1), gemcitabine (1200 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8), or pemetrexed (500 mg/m2 on day 1). Patients in the bevacizumab group received bevacizumab 15 mg/kg intravenously every 21 days starting with cycle 1 of chemotherapy and continuing for 1 year. We randomly allocated patients (1:1) to group A (chemotherapy alone) or group B (chemotherapy plus bevacizumab), centrally, using permuted blocks sizes and stratified by chemotherapy regimen, stage of disease, histology, and sex. No one was masked to treatment assignment, except the Data Safety and Monitoring Committee. The primary endpoint was overall survival, analysed by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00324805. FINDINGS: Between June 1, 2007, and Sept 20, 2013, 1501 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to the two treatment groups: 749 to group A (chemotherapy alone) and 752 to group B (chemotherapy plus bevacizumab). 383 (26%) of 1458 patients (with complete staging information) had stage IB, 636 (44%) had stage II, and 439 (30%) had stage IIIA disease (stage of disease data were missing for 43 patients). Squamous cell histology was reported for 422 (28%) of 1501 patients. All four cisplatin-based chemotherapy regimens were used: 377 (25%) patients received vinorelbine, 343 (23%) received docetaxel, 283 (19%) received gemcitabine, and 497 (33%) received pemetrexed. At a median follow-up of 50·3 months (IQR 32·9-68·0), the estimated median overall survival in group A has not been reached, and in group B was 85·8 months (95% CI 74·9 to not reached); hazard ratio (group B vs group A) 0·99 (95% CI 0·82-1·19; p=0·90). Grade 3-5 toxicities of note (all attributions) that were reported more frequently in group B (the bevacizumab group) than in group A (chemotherapy alone) were overall worst grade (ie, all grade 3-5 toxicities; 496 [67%] of 738 in group A vs 610 [83%] of 735 in group B), hypertension (60 [8%] vs 219 [30%]), and neutropenia (241 [33%] vs 275 [37%]). The number of deaths on treatment did not differ between the groups (15 deaths in group A vs 19 in group B). Of these deaths, three in group A and ten in group B were considered at least possibly related to treatment. INTERPRETATION: Addition of bevacizumab to adjuvant chemotherapy did not improve overall survival for patients with surgically resected early-stage NSCLC. Bevacizumab does not have a role in this setting and should not be considered as an adjuvant therapy for patients with resected early-stage NSCLC. FUNDING: National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health.

Validation of Progression-Free Survival as a Surrogate Endpoint for Overall Survival in Malignant Mesothelioma: Analysis of Cancer and Leukemia Group B and North Central Cancer Treatment Group (Alliance) Trials.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to investigate whether progression-free survival (PFS) can be considered a surrogate endpoint for overall survival (OS) in malignant mesothelioma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Individual data were collected from 15 Cancer and Leukemia Group B (615 patients) and 2 North Central Cancer Treatment Group (101 patients) phase II trials. The effects of 5 risk factors for OS and PFS, including age, histology, performance status (PS), white blood cell count, and European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) risk score, were used in the analysis. Individual-level surrogacy was assessed by Kendall's tau through a Clayton bivariate Copula survival (CBCS) model. Summary-level surrogacy was evaluated via the association between logarithms of the hazard ratio (log HR)-log HROS and log HRPFS-measured in R2 from a weighted least-square (WLS) regression model and the CBCS model. RESULTS: The median PFS for all patients was 3.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.8-3.5 months) and the median OS was 7.2 months (95% CI, 6.5-8.0 months). Moderate correlations between PFS and OS were observed across all risk factors at the individual level, with Kendall's tau ranging from 0.46 to 0.47. The summary-level surrogacy varied among risk factors. The Copula R2 ranged from 0.51 for PS to 0.78 for histology. The WLS R2 ranged from 0.26 for EORTC and PS to 0.67 for age. CONCLUSIONS: The analyses demonstrated low to moderate individual-level surrogacy between PFS and OS. At the summary level, the surrogacy between PFS and OS varied significantly across different risk factors. With a short postprogression survival and a moderate correlation between PFS and OS, there is no evidence that PFS is a valid surrogate endpoint for OS in malignant mesothelioma. The Oncologist 2017;22:189-198Implications for Practice: For better disease management and for more efficient clinical trial designs, it is important to know if progression-free survival (PFS) is a good surrogate endpoint for overall survival in malignant mesothelioma. With a relatively large database of 17 phase II trials and 716 patients from Cancer and Leukemia Group B and North Central Cancer Treatment Group, we conducted statistical analyses and found that there is no evidence to suggest that PFS is a valid surrogate endpoint for OS for malignant mesothelioma. Future research work is needed to find alternative surrogate endpoints for OS.

A phase I dose-escalation study of TAK-733, an investigational oral MEK inhibitor, in patients with advanced solid tumors.

Purpose TAK-733, an investigational, selective, allosteric MEK1/2 inhibitor, has demonstrated antitumor effects against multiple cancer cell lines and xenograft models. This first-in-human study investigated TAK-733 in patients with solid tumors. Methods Patients received oral TAK-733 once daily on days 1-21 in 28-day treatment cycles. Adverse events (AEs) were graded using the Common Terminology Criteria for AEs version 3.0. Response was assessed using RECIST v1.1. Blood samples for TAK-733 pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics (inhibition of ERK phosphorylation) were collected during cycle 1. Results Fifty-one patients received TAK-733 0.2-22 mg. Primary diagnoses included uveal melanoma (24 %), colon cancer (22 %), and cutaneous melanoma (10 %). Four patients had dose-limiting toxicities of dermatitis acneiform, plus fatigue and pustular rash in one patient, and stomatitis in one patient. The maximum tolerated dose was 16 mg. Common drug-related AEs included dermatitis acneiform (51 %), diarrhea (29 %), and increased blood creatine phosphokinase (20 %); grade ≥ 3 AEs were reported in 27 (53 %) patients. Median Tmax was 3 h; systemic exposure increased less than dose-proportionally over the dose range 0.2-22 mg. On day 21 maximum inhibition of ERK phosphorylation in peripheral blood mononuclear cells of 46-97 % was seen in patients receiving TAK-733 ≥ 8.4 mg. Among 41 response-evaluable patients, 2 (5 %) patients with cutaneous melanoma (one with BRAF L597R mutant melanoma) had partial responses. Conclusions TAK-733 had a generally manageable toxicity profile up to the maximum tolerated dose, and showed the anticipated pharmacodynamic effect of sustained inhibition of ERK phosphorylation. Limited antitumor activity was demonstrated. Further investigation is not currently planned.

Lung cancer and metastasis: new opportunities and challenges.

Lung cancer continues to attract special attention since the real number of lung cancer mortality and incidence in 2014 was definitely higher than those estimated numbers according to the report from World Health Organization. The present special issue highly focuses on advanced discovery and development of lung cancer and metastasis and discusses about potential opportunities and challenges to be faced. The present issue explores clinical applications of cancer immunotherapies, gene therapies, radiotherapies, or target-oriented therapies. A new and novel methodology can be used to identify differential interactions of driver genes, cancer-predictive genes, subtype-specific genes, or disease-exclusive genes or gene pairs from imbalanced or heterogeneous datasets. We also demonstrate the importance of lung cancer-specific gene mutations, epigenetics, gene sequencing, heterogeneity, or biomarker discovery. Clinical bioinformatics is emphasized as a critical tool and merging science. Novel therapies are designed and expected on basis of oncogenic molecular aberrations in lung cancer.

New strategies to develop new medications for lung cancer and metastasis.

With the advances in cancer and molecular biology and the rapid progress in genomics, significant progress has been made in the treatment of lung cancer in the past decade. Targeted therapies have been developed for nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and significant improvement in survival has been achieved. There is still, however, no cure for advanced NSCLC. Resistance to initial therapy is universal, and the lethal outcome of metastatic disease still remains. Approaches to preventing metastases and overcoming resistance to therapy are necessary to ensure long-term survival of patients with advanced lung cancer.

Efficacy of focal adhesion kinase inhibition in non-small cell lung cancer with oncogenically activated MAPK pathways.

BACKGROUND: Focal adhesion kinase (FAK) is overexpressed in many types of tumours, including lung cancer. Y15, a small molecule which inhibits Y397 FAK autophosphorylation, decreases growth of human neuroblastoma, breast and pancreatic cancers. In this study, we investigated the in vitro and in vivo effects of Y15, and the underlying mechanism on non-small cell lung cancer cells. METHODS: The cytotoxic effects of Y15 targeting FAK signalling were evaluated. Gene-knockdown experiments were performed to determine the anti-cancer mechanism. Xenografts with RAS or EGFR mutations were selected for in vivo Y15 treatment. RESULTS: Y15 blocked autophosphorylation of FAK in a time- and dose-dependent manner. It caused dose-dependent decrease of lung cancer cell viability and clonogenicity. Y15 inhibited tumour growth of RAS-mutant (A549 with KRAS mutation and H1299 with NRAS mutation), as well as epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutant (H1650 and H1975) lung cancer xenografts. JNK activation is a mechanism underlying Y15-induced Bcl-2 and Mcl-1 downregulation. Moreover, knockdown of Bcl-2 or Bcl-xL potentiated the effects of Y15. The combination of various inhibitors of the Bcl-2 family of proteins with FAK inhibitors demonstrated synergy in multiple lung cancer cell lines in vitro. CONCLUSIONS: FAK inhibition demonstrated efficacy both in vitro and in vivo in lung cancers with either oncogenic RAS or EGFR mutations. In addition, FAK inhibition in combination with inhibitors of Bcl-2 family of anti-apoptotic proteins has synergistic activity in these MAPK-activated non-small cell lung cancer cell line models.

Targeting Angiogenesis in Cancer Therapy: Moving Beyond Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor.

UNLABELLED: Angiogenesis, or the formation of new capillary blood vessels, occurs primarily during human development and reproduction; however, aberrant regulation of angiogenesis is also a fundamental process found in several pathologic conditions, including cancer. As a process required for invasion and metastasis, tumor angiogenesis constitutes an important point of control of cancer progression. Although not yet completely understood, the complex process of tumor angiogenesis involves highly regulated orchestration of multiple signaling pathways. The proangiogenic signaling molecule vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and its cognate receptor (VEGF receptor 2 [VEGFR-2]) play a central role in angiogenesis and often are highly expressed in human cancers, and initial clinical efforts to develop antiangiogenic treatments focused largely on inhibiting VEGF/VEGFR signaling. Such approaches, however, often lead to transient responses and further disease progression because angiogenesis is regulated by multiple pathways that are able to compensate for each other when single pathways are inhibited. The platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF) and PDGF receptor (PDGFR) and fibroblast growth factor (FGF) and FGF receptor (FGFR) pathways, for example, provide potential escape mechanisms from anti-VEGF/VEGFR therapy that could facilitate resumption of tumor growth. Accordingly, more recent treatments have focused on inhibiting multiple signaling pathways simultaneously. This comprehensive review discusses the limitations of inhibiting VEGF signaling alone as an antiangiogenic strategy, the importance of other angiogenic pathways including PDGF/PDGFR and FGF/FGFR, and the novel current and emerging agents that target multiple angiogenic pathways for the treatment of advanced solid tumors. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Significant advances in cancer treatment have been achieved with the development of antiangiogenic agents, the majority of which have focused on inhibition of the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) pathway. VEGF targeting alone, however, has not proven to be as efficacious as originally hoped, and it is increasingly clear that there are many interconnected and compensatory pathways that can overcome VEGF-targeted inhibition of angiogenesis. Maximizing the potential of antiangiogenic therapy is likely to require a broader therapeutic approach using a new generation of multitargeted antiangiogenic agents.

A phase I study of the histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitor entinostat, in combination with sorafenib in patients with advanced solid tumors.

Based on preclinical data demonstrating cytotoxic synergy between sorafenib and entinostat, a phase I study of this combination was conducted in patients with advanced solid tumors. Enrollment followed the traditional "3 + 3" dose escalation scheme. Entinostat was given orally once every 2 weeks, starting at a dose of 4 mg and escalating to 6 and 10 mg every 2 weeks. Sorafenib was administered as a continuous oral dose, escalating from 200 to 400 mg twice daily. A treatment cycle was 28 days. A total of 31 patients with advanced solid tumors were enrolled on the study. The three dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) observed were grade 3 hand-foot syndrome, nausea/vomiting, and fatigue. MTD was not reached. The recommended phase II dose was defined as the full dose of the respective drugs administered individually. The most common grade 3-4 toxicities were muscle weakness (13 %), skin rash (10 %), fatigue (6 %), diarrhea (6 %), and hand-foot syndrome (3 %). One NSCLC patient achieved a partial response. Two patients (adenocarcinoma of GE junction and Hurthle cell carcinoma of the thyroid) were on the study for more than 9 months with stable disease. The combination of entinostat and sorafenib was well tolerated. Entinostat 10 mg orally once every 2 weeks in combination with sorafenib 400 mg orally twice daily, representing full single agent doses of each drug was identified as the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D). These data support future clinical development of the combination of entinostat and sorafenib.