Abemaciclib for treating patients with HR+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer: a real-world study in France, Italy and Spain.

Aim: This real-world study aimed to describe patient and clinical characteristics, treatment patterns and outcomes for patients with HR+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer receiving abemaciclib in France, Italy and Spain.Materials & methods: A multicenter chart review was conducted for adult females with HR+/HER2- advanced/metastatic breast cancer who received abemaciclib in routine care. Real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS) was estimated via Kaplan-Meier curves.Results: This study included 151, 173 and 175 patients from France, Italy and Spain, respectively. Abemaciclib was mostly prescribed as first-line therapy concomitantly with hormone therapy. Median rwPFS was >20 months and the 1-year rwPFS rate was >70%.Conclusion: Effectiveness was similar across the three countries and aligns with pivotal studies.

Abemaciclib use in the clinic in France, Italy & SpainThis study describes patients, the treatments they have received and the results of those treatments for patients with the most common type of advanced breast cancer. These patients were taking abemaciclib plus hormonal therapy in routine breast cancer care in France, Italy and Spain. The information used to conduct this study was taken from patients' medical charts. In this real-world study, abemaciclib was mostly used as the initial treatment for advanced breast cancer. Abemaciclib effectiveness was similar across the three countries confirming findings from previous studies. Our study supports the use of abemaciclib for patients with HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer.

Safety and efficacy of abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy in older patients with hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer: an age-specific subgroup analysis of MONARCH 2 and 3 trials.

PURPOSE: Abemaciclib in combination with endocrine therapy (ET) has demonstrated significant efficacy benefits in HR+ , HER2- advanced breast cancer patients in the Phase 3 studies MONARCH 2 (fulvestrant as ET) and MONARCH 3 (letrozole or anastrozole as ET). Here, we report age-specific safety and efficacy outcomes. METHODS: Exploratory analyses of MONARCH 2 and 3 were performed for 3 age groups (<65, 65-74, and ≥75 years). For safety, data were pooled from both studies; for efficacy, a subgroup analysis of PFS was performed for each trial independently. RESULTS: Pooled safety data were available for 1152 patients. Clinically relevant diarrhea (Grade 2/3) was higher in older patients receiving abemaciclib + ET (<65, 39.5%; 65-74, 45.2%; ≥75, 55.4%) versus placebo + ET (<65, 6.8%; 65-74, 4.5%; ≥75, 16.0%). Nausea, decreased appetite, and venous thromboembolic events were all moderately higher in older patients. Neutropenia (Grade ≥ 3) did not differ as a function of age in the abemaciclib + ET arm (<65, 25.8%; 65-74, 27.4%; ≥75, 18.1%). Dose adjustments and discontinuation rates were slightly higher in older patients. Abemaciclib + ET improved PFS compared with placebo + ET independent of patient age, with no significant difference in abemaciclib treatment effect between the 3 age groups (MONARCH 2: interaction p-value, 0.695; MONARCH 3: interaction p-value, 0.634). Estimated hazard ratios ranged from 0.523-0.633 (MONARCH 2) and 0.480-0.635 (MONARCH 3). CONCLUSIONS: While higher rates of adverse events were reported in older patients, they were manageable with dose adjustments and concomitant medication. Importantly, a consistent efficacy benefit was observed across all age groups. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02107703 (first posted April 8, 2014) and NCT02246621 (first posted September 23, 2014).

Identification of Patients with Early HR+ HER2- Breast Cancer at High Risk of Recurrence.

Breast cancer incidence has increased in the last two decades and, simultaneously, survival has improved due to earlier detection and improved treatment options. Despite this improvement, locoregional recurrences and distant metastases occur in up to 10 and 30% of women diagnosed with early breast cancer, respectively. Around 70% of breast cancers are hormone receptor positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative (HER2-), and associated with a persistent risk of relapse up to 20 years after diagnosis/initial treatment. We conducted a narrative review by combining PubMed searches with our clinical experience to describe patient characteristics, biomarkers, and genomic profiling tools available to clinicians for the identification of patients with HR+, HER2- early breast cancer at high risk of recurrence and to provide recommendations to classify patients into recurrence risk categories. National and international treatment guidelines are also summarised. Accurate assessment of the risk of recurrence in these patients is crucial as the predicted risk guides treatment decisions; imprecise estimations can result in over- or undertreatment, with either scenario having negative consequences for patients. Multiple prognostic tools and factors are recommended for early breast cancer, and no single test provides accurate prognosis in isolation. Since no single test can provide accurate prognosis in isolation, a combination of tools should be used. Risk thresholds are important to guide optimised and balanced therapeutic decisions in HR+, HER2- early breast cancer. However, prognostic assessment should be performed on a case-by-case basis, making patient-specific prognostic approaches essential to avoid over- or undertreatment.

Maintenance therapy with pemetrexed plus best supportive care versus placebo plus best supportive care after induction therapy with pemetrexed plus cisplatin for advanced non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (PARAMOUNT): a double-blind, phase 3, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) benefit from pemetrexed maintenance therapy after induction therapy with a platinum-containing, non-pemetrexed doublet. The PARAMOUNT trial investigated whether continuation maintenance with pemetrexed improved progression-free survival after induction therapy with pemetrexed plus cisplatin. METHODS: In this double-blind, multicentre, phase 3, randomised placebo-controlled trial, patients with advanced non-squamous NSCLC aged 18 years or older, with no previous systemic chemotherapy for lung cancer, with at least one measurable lesion, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1 participated. Before randomisation, patients entered an induction phase which consisted of four cycles of induction pemetrexed (500 mg/m(2)) plus cisplatin (75 mg/m(2)) on day 1 of a 21-day cycle. Patients who did not progress after completion of four cycles of induction and who had an ECOG performance status of 0 or 1 were stratified according to disease stage (IIIB or IV), ECOG performance status (0 or 1), and induction response (complete or partial response, or stable disease), and randomly assigned (2:1 ratio) to receive maintenance therapy with either pemetrexed (500 mg/m(2) every 21 days) plus best supportive care or placebo plus best supportive care until disease progression. Randomisation was done with the Pocock and Simon minimisation method. Patients and investigators were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00789373. FINDINGS: Of the 1022 patients enrolled, 939 participated in the induction phase. Of these, 539 patients were randomly assigned to receive continuation maintenance with pemetrexed plus best supportive care (n=359) or with placebo plus best supportive care (n=180). Among the 359 patients randomised to continuation maintenance with pemetrexed, there was a significant reduction in the risk of disease progression over the placebo group (HR 0·62, 95% CI 0·49-0·79; p<0·0001). The median progression-free survival, measured from randomisation, was 4·1 months (95% CI 3·2-4·6) for pemetrexed and 2·8 months (2·6-3·1) for placebo. Possibly treatment-related laboratory grade 3-4 adverse events were more common in the pemetrexed group (33 [9%] of 359 patients) than in the placebo group (one [<1%] of 180 patients; p<0·0001), as were non-laboratory grade 3-5 adverse events (32 [9%] of 359 patients in the pemetrexed group; eight [4%] of 180 patients in the placebo group; p=0·080); one possibly treatment-related death was reported in each group. The most common adverse events of grade 3-4 in the pemetrexed group were anaemia (16 [4%] of 359 patients), neutropenia (13 [4%]), and fatigue (15 [4%]). In the placebo group, these adverse events were less common: anaemia (one [<1%] of 180 patients), neutropenia (none), and fatigue (one <1%]). The most frequent serious adverse events were anaemia (eight [2%] of 359 patients in the pemetrexed group vs none in the placebo group) and febrile neutropenia (five [1%] vs none). Discontinuations due to drug-related adverse events occurred in 19 (5%) patients in the pemetrexed group and six (3%) patients in the placebo group. INTERPRETATION: Continuation maintenance with pemetrexed is an effective and well tolerated treatment option for patients with advanced non-squamous NSCLC with good performance status who have not progressed after induction therapy with pemetrexed plus cisplatin. FUNDING: Eli Lilly and Company.

A phase II randomized study of cisplatin-pemetrexed plus either enzastaurin or placebo in chemonaive patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Enzastaurin is a serine/threonine kinase inhibitor that targets protein kinase C and AKT pathways. Enzastaurin and pemetrexed demonstrated synergy in preclinical studies. This trial was designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of first-line enzastaurin plus cisplatin-pemetrexed in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: A safety lead-in phase (n = 13) of enzastaurin 125 or 250 mg twice daily was added to cisplatin-pemetrexed. A subsequent randomized, placebo-controlled phase II study (n = 22) of the combination was conducted to evaluate efficacy. RESULTS: The combination was well tolerated and showed activity, with 7 (53.8%, 95% CI 26.7-80.9) confirmed partial responses and 2 stable diseases in 13 treated patients in the lead-in phase. However, the study was terminated early based on interim results from two phase II NSCLC studies of enzastaurin plus cytotoxic chemotherapy, which indicated no efficacy improvement. CONCLUSIONS: Enzastaurin and cisplatin-pemetrexed is tolerable with preliminary activity in patients with advanced NSCLC, but because of a lack of efficacy improvement in other phase II NSCLC studies, the study was terminated early.

Healthcare resource utilization and associated cost analysis of the PROCLAIM study in patients with stage III non-small-cell lung cancer.

Objective: To analyze patient-reported swallowing difficulties, healthcare resource utilization and associated costs during the PROCLAIM study. Methods: Patients with stage III non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer received pemetrexed-cisplatin (PemCis) combined with concurrent thoracic radiotherapy followed by consolidation pemetrexed, or concurrent chemoradiotherapy with etoposide-cisplatin (EtoCis) followed by standard consolidation chemotherapy. Patient - reported swallowing function was measured using diaries. Resource utilization (hospitalizations, transfusions, concomitant medications) was compared between treatment arms using Fisher's exact test and independent t-test. Medical resource use costs were analyzed using nonparametric Wilcoxon rank sum test. Results: Patient-reported difficulty in swallowing function (diary score ≥4) was 33.8% in the PemCis arm and 29% in the EtoCis arm. Overall resource use, including hospitalizations, was similar between treatment arms; however, fewer patients in the PemCis arm received transfusions and selected concomitant medications. Concurrent phase analyses were consistent with the overall study. A significantly lower percentage of patients (31.1% vs. 40.8%) were hospitalized in the PemCis arm. Total costs were significantly higher in the PemCis arm. Other medical costs (excluding study treatment costs) during the concurrent phase were lower for patients in the PemCis arm, due to significantly lower hospitalization costs and lower use of concomitant medications. Subgroup analysis yielded similar results. Conclusions: Patient-reported difficulty in swallowing post-baseline and resource utilization were consistent with previously reported safety outcomes. In the overall study, higher total costs for PemCis were driven by study drug cost. When adjusting for treatment duration, other monthly medical costs were favorable to PemCis. Patients on pemetrexed remained longer on therapy, suggesting better tolerability. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00686959.

The Impact of Staging by Positron-Emission Tomography on Overall Survival and Progression-Free Survival in Patients With Locally Advanced NSCLC.

INTRODUCTION: We investigated the potential impact of stage migration because of positron-emission tomography (PET) scan staging on survival in the locally advanced (stage IIIA/B) NSCLC setting. METHODS: In PROCLAIM, 598 patients with stage IIIA/B nonsquamous NSCLC (intent-to-treat population) were randomized to either pemetrexed plus cisplatin and concurrent thoracic radiotherapy for 3 cycles followed by 4 cycles of pemetrexed consolidation or etoposide plus cisplatin and concurrent thoracic radiotherapy for 2 cycles followed by a consolidation platinum-based doublet regimen for up to 2 cycles. Baseline PET scan (PET Yes versus No) was one of the stratification factors. Subgroup analyses (PET Yes versus No) of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were conducted on the intent-to-treat population regardless of treatment, as the study did not show superior efficacy for either arm. RESULTS: Majority (491 of 598; 82.1%) of patients had a baseline PET scan staging performed. A longer median OS (PET Yes versus No: 27.2 versus 20.8; hazard ratio = 0.81, p = 0.130) and an improved median PFS (PET Yes versus No: 11.3 versus 9.2; hazard ratio = 0.73, p = 0.012) were observed for patients with PET scans compared to those with conventional staging in both treatment arms. CONCLUSIONS: Both a significantly improved PFS and a numerically longer OS in the PET Yes subgroup, compared to patients with conventional staging, are consistent with improved survival due to stage migration. The magnitude of differences in OS and PFS based on PET scan is a reminder of the potential for factors other than the therapeutic intervention to affect outcomes.

Radiation Therapy Quality Assurance (RTQA) of Concurrent Chemoradiation Therapy for Locally Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer in the PROCLAIM Phase 3 Trial.

PURPOSE: Chemoradiation therapy trials of different tumors, including lung cancer, have shown a correlation between protocol deviations and adverse outcomes. Radiation therapy quality assurance (RTQA) was mandated for all patients treated in the PROCLAIM trial evaluating 2 different chemoradiation therapy regimens. The RTQA results were evaluated from the PROCLAIM study, and the impact of irradiation deviations on efficacy outcomes was investigated. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The study was conducted from 2008 to 2014. Review of the irradiation plan was mandated for all patients. Real-time review was performed prior to irradiation start for the first enrolled patient at each site and randomly in 20% of additional patients, with non-real-time review in the remainder. The RTQA criteria evaluated included planning target volume coverage, dose homogeneity, volume of lung receiving ≥20 Gy, and maximum point dose to spinal cord. RESULTS: Major RTQA violations occurred in 40 of 554 patients, treated at 28 sites. Seven sites treated ≥2 patients with major violations. Stage IIIB disease and larger planning target volume were observed more frequently in patients with major violations. Major violations were more prevalent in sites treating either <6 patients or >15 patients. Patients treated at sites enrolling ≥2 patients with major violations (n = 86) had lower median overall survival (21.1 months vs 29.8 months; hazard ratio, 1.442) and progression-free survival (7.3 months vs 11.3 months; hazard ratio, 1.345) than patients treated at sites without major violations. These findings remained significant for overall survival on multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Major violations in treatment plans were uncommon in the PROCLAIM study, possibly reflecting mandatory RTQA. The RTQA violations were more frequent in patients requiring more complex chemoradiation therapy plans. Poorer observed outcomes at centers with multiple major violations are hypothesis generating.

Evaluation of changes in renal function in PARAMOUNT: a phase III study of maintenance pemetrexed plus best supportive care versus placebo plus best supportive care after induction treatment with pemetrexed plus cisplatin for advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the effect of long-term pemetrexed maintenance therapy on patients' renal function. METHODS: In the PARAMOUNT phase III trial (NCT 00789373), pemetrexed was compared with placebo as maintenance treatment in advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer patients who completed 4 cycles of pemetrexed plus cisplatin induction therapy. To evaluate changes in renal function during pemetrexed continuation maintenance treatment, we retrospectively analyzed changes in serum creatinine (sCr), treatment-emergent adverse events, dose delays and treatment discontinuations associated with impaired renal function. RESULTS: Creatinine clearance ≥45 mL/min was required before the start of any cycle. Patients on pemetrexed maintenance had a significantly higher percentage maximum increase in sCr over baseline versus placebo for the range of ≥10% to ≥90% increase (p < .05). The risk of experiencing renal events leading to dose delays and discontinuations was higher with higher increases in sCr but reversible in most patients. sCr increases of ≥30% and ≥40% were associated with gender (female), age (<70 years) and longer exposure to pemetrexed compared with placebo. Sixteen (4%) pemetrexed patients and 1 (1%) placebo patient discontinued treatment due to drug-related renal events; 13/16 (81%) of those pemetrexed patients had sCr increases ≥30% and 7/13 (54%) had pre-existing conditions and/or were receiving nephrotoxic drugs. CONCLUSIONS: The appearance of renal events leading to dose delays and/or treatment discontinuations was associated with sCr increase of at least 30%. However, it was difficult to identify patients at a higher risk of treatment discontinuation due to a drug-related renal event based only on changes in pre-maintenance laboratory values.

The Effect of Necitumumab in Combination with Gemcitabine plus Cisplatin on Tolerability and on Quality of Life: Results from the Phase 3 SQUIRE Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Necitumumab, a second-generation, recombinant human immunoglobulin G1 epidermal growth factor receptor antibody in the phase 3 SQUIRE trial (NCT00981058), increased survival benefit for patients randomized to receive necitumumab plus gemcitabine-cisplatin compared with those who received gemcitabine-cisplatin. Here we characterize health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and tolerability results. METHODS: A total of 1093 patients with stage IV squamous non-small cell lung cancer were randomized 1:1 to receive necitumumab (800 mg absolute dose intravenously [IV]) plus gemcitabine-cisplatin (gemcitabine = 1250 mg/m(2) IV on days 1 and 8; cisplatin = 75 mg/m(2) IV on day 1) or gemcitabine-cisplatin alone (every 21 days) for up to six cycles. Patients receiving necitumumab plus gemcitabine-cisplatin without disease progression continued necitumumab until progression. HRQoL was measured by Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, the Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS), and the European Quality of Life Five-Dimensions questionnaire. Efficacy and LCSS outcomes were analyzed using the baseline maximum severity score of the LCSS. Tolerability was measured in terms of exposure to the study treatment and adverse events. Hospitalization rates were collected. RESULTS: Most patients in both study arms similarly maintained Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status and comparable LCSS and European Quality of Life Five-Dimensions questionnaire assessments. Patients with a higher baseline LCSS had a greater survival benefit on the necitumumab arm. Chemotherapy exposure was similar in both treatment arms; 51% of patients on the necitumumab plus gemcitabine-cisplatin arm continued on single-agent necitumumab. The most frequent grade 4 adverse events were neutropenia (6.1% versus 7.9%) and thrombocytopenia (3.2% versus 4.3%) in the necitumumab plus gemcitabine-cisplatin versus gemcitabine-cisplatin arms, respectively. Hospitalizations were slightly higher with necitumumab plus gemcitabine-cisplatin (36.4%) than with gemcitabine-cisplatin (34.0%). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of necitumumab to gemcitabine-cisplatin was well tolerated, did not negatively affect HRQoL or toxicity, and particularly benefited patients with more severe baseline symptoms or lower HRQoL.

PROCLAIM: Randomized Phase III Trial of Pemetrexed-Cisplatin or Etoposide-Cisplatin Plus Thoracic Radiation Therapy Followed by Consolidation Chemotherapy in Locally Advanced Nonsquamous Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

PURPOSE: The phase III PROCLAIM study evaluated overall survival (OS) of concurrent pemetrexed-cisplatin and thoracic radiation therapy (TRT) followed by consolidation pemetrexed, versus etoposide-cisplatin and TRT followed by nonpemetrexed doublet consolidation therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with stage IIIA/B unresectable nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer randomly received (1:1) pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2) and cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) intravenously every 3 weeks for three cycles plus concurrent TRT (60 to 66 Gy) followed by pemetrexed consolidation every 3 weeks for four cycles (arm A), or standard therapy with etoposide 50 mg/m(2) and cisplatin 50 mg/m(2) intravenously, every 4 weeks for two cycles plus concurrent TRT (60 to 66 Gy) followed by two cycles of consolidation platinum-based doublet chemotherapy (arm B). The primary objective was OS. The study was designed as a superiority trial with 80% power to detect an OS hazard ratio of 0.74 with a type 1 error of .05. RESULTS: Enrollment was stopped early because of futility. Five hundred ninety-eight patients were randomly assigned (301 to arm A, 297 to arm B) and 555 patients (283 in arm A, 272 in arm B) were treated. Arm A was not superior to arm B in terms of OS (hazard ratio, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.20; median, 26.8 v 25.0 months; P = .831). Arm A had a significantly lower incidence of any drug-related grade 3 to 4 adverse events (64.0% v 76.8%; P = .001), including neutropenia (24.4% v 44.5%; P < .001), during the overall treatment period. CONCLUSION: Pemetrexed-cisplatin combined with TRT followed by consolidation pemetrexed was not superior to standard chemoradiotherapy for stage III unresectable nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer.

Final results from a Phase II study of pemetrexed and cisplatin with concurrent thoracic radiation after Pem-Cis induction in patients with unresectable locally advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

OBJECTIVES: This single-arm multicenter Phase II study investigated the efficacy and safety of pemetrexed (Pem) and cisplatin (Cis) induction chemotherapy (CT) followed by full-dose Pem-Cis plus concurrent radiotherapy (RT) in patients with locally advanced non-squamous NSCLC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with unresectable Stage III non-squamous NSCLC received two 21-day cycles of Pem 500 mg/m(2) (vitamin/folic acid supplementation and dexamethasone prophylaxis per Pem-label)+Cis 75 mg/m(2) on Day 1. Eligible patients who had not progressed continued with 2 further cycles of full-dose Pem-Cis plus concurrent RT (2 Gy/fraction, 5 days/week, 66 Gy total). Primary endpoint was the 1-year progression-free survival (PFS) rate. RESULTS: Of 90 patients enrolled (all treated; median age 61 years, male/female 57%/43%, ECOG performance status 0/1 66%/34%, adenocarcinoma 90%, Stage III 36%/62%), 75 (83%) completed induction CT and started concurrent CT+RT. 64 (71%) patients received all 4 CT cycles and an RT dose ≥60 Gy. The 1-year PFS rate was 51.3% (95%CI: 42.0, 60.5). Median PFS was 10.6 months (95%CI: 8.6, 17.3), median OS was 26.2 months (95%CI: 16.7, not estimable). One patient died from enteritis (treatment-related) during Cycle 4. Four patients discontinued due to treatment-related adverse events, 1 on induction CT (renal failure), 3 on concurrent CT+RT (1 hypoacusis, 2 acute esophagitis). During induction CT, 18.9% of patients reported Grade 3/4 CTCAEs, only neutropenia (2.2%) and syncope (2.2%) were reported by >1 patient. During concurrent CT+RT, 41.3% of patients reported G3/4 CTCAEs, mainly esophagitis (12.0%), neutropenia (10.7%), and leukopenia (9.3%). CONCLUSION: In this study of Pem-Cis induction CT followed by full-dose Pem-Cis with concurrent RT, median PFS was 10.6 months and toxicity was manageable, in line with previous data on Pem-Cis plus RT.

Long-term and low-grade safety results of a phase III study (PARAMOUNT): maintenance pemetrexed plus best supportive care versus placebo plus best supportive care immediately after induction treatment with pemetrexed plus cisplatin for advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer.

INTRODUCTION: In the PARAMOUNT ("A Phase 3, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study of Maintenance Pemetrexed plus Best Supportive Care vs. Best Supportive Care Immediately Following Induction Treatment with Pemetrexed Plus Cisplatin for Advanced Non-Squamous Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer") trial, patients with advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NS-NSCLC) benefited from pemetrexed maintenance therapy after induction therapy with pemetrexed and cisplatin by extending survival, delaying disease progression, and maintaining quality of life (QoL). However, low-grade 1 or 2 toxicities during long-term maintenance treatment may become burdensome and impact QoL. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients in this double-blind study (n = 539), who had completed 4 induction cycles (pemetrexed with cisplatin) without progressive disease (PD) and had an ECOG performance status of 0/1, were randomized 2:1 to pemetrexed maintenance (500 mg/m(2), day 1) plus best supportive care (BSC) or placebo plus BSC until PD. Adverse events (by maximum Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [CTCAE] grade) and QoL (EuroQol 5-dimensional [EQ-5D] scale) were assessed. RESULTS: A median of 4 maintenance cycles was administered (range, pemetrexed 1-44; mean ± SD 7.9 ± 8.3; placebo 1-38; mean ± SD 5.0 ± 5.2), with 28% of pemetrexed and 12% of placebo patients receiving ≥ 10 maintenance cycles. The pemetrexed dose intensity was 94%. More patients receiving pemetrexed (12%) than placebo discontinued because of possible drug-related CTCAEs (4%; P = .005). Overall, pemetrexed was associated with significantly more (P < .05) low-grade events (grade 1/2 nausea, grade 2 anemia, edema, and neutropenia) than placebo. Overall, the incidence of low-grade fatigue, anemia, and neutropenia decreased with long-term pemetrexed exposure; however, renal events increased across treatment arms. EQ-5D analyses demonstrated no treatment-by-time interaction or overall treatment differences between the 2 arms. CONCLUSION: PARAMOUNT demonstrated a low incidence of low-grade toxicities with long-term pemetrexed exposure without compromising QoL in patients with NS-NSCLC.

Final efficacy and safety results of pemetrexed continuation maintenance therapy in the elderly from the PARAMOUNT phase III study.

INTRODUCTION: The PARAMOUNT Phase III trial showed that maintenance pemetrexed after pemetrexed plus cisplatin induction was well tolerated and effective for patients with advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer. Approximately 17% of patients receiving maintenance therapy in this study were 70 years of age or older. Here we report efficacy and safety results from the PARAMOUNT study for elderly (≥70 years) and non-elderly (<70 years) patients. METHODS: Final efficacy and safety data from the PARAMOUNT study were analyzed post hoc using subgroup analyses for elderly and non-elderly patients. RESULTS: The median age was 73 years in the elderly subgroup (n = 92) and 60 years in the non-elderly subgroup (n = 447). Subgroups had similar baseline characteristics, except for a higher percentage of males and patients with a performance status of one in the elderly subgroup. For elderly patients, the median PFS was 6.4 months for pemetrexed and 3.0 months for placebo; the median OS was 13.7 months for pemetrexed and 12.1 months for placebo. For non-elderly patients, the median PFS was 4.0 months for pemetrexed and 2.8 months for placebo; the median OS was 13.9 months for pemetrexed and 10.8 months for placebo. Elderly patients experienced similar levels of low-grade toxicities, but had a higher percentage of grade 3/4 anemia and neutropenia than non-elderly patients, although importantly, this did not translate into increased febrile neutropenia. CONCLUSIONS: Continuation maintenance pemetrexed had comparable survival and toxicity profiles in the elderly and non-elderly subgroups. However, grade 3/4 anemia and neutropenia were numerically higher for elderly patients.

Phase I study of pemetrexed and cisplatin with concurrent high-dose thoracic radiation after induction chemotherapy in patients with unresectable locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: This is a phase I, escalating-dose trial targeting exclusively patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), investigating pemetrexed and fixed-dose cisplatin concurrently administered with high-dose radiotherapy (RT) after induction chemotherapy (CT). Primary objective was to determine the maximum tolerated dose and recommended phase II dose of pemetrexed. PATIENTS AND MATERIALS: Patients with unresected stage III NSCLC, planned V20 ≤ 35%, and FEV ≥ 1.3 L, were treated every 21 days for 2 cycles (pemetrexed 500 mg/m2; cisplatin 75 mg/m2), followed by 2 cycles of concurrent CT-RT: pemetrexed starting dose was 400 mg/m2, escalated up to 800 mg/m2 per 100mg/m2 dose level (DL), cisplatin at 75 mg/m2 and RT at fixed dose of 66 Gy/33 fractions. RESULTS: Nine of 10 enrolled patients (age range 46-68 years; 6 men; ECOG PS 0 [6 patients], PS 1 [4]; stage IIIA [1], IIIB [9]; 6 adenocarcinomas, 3 squamous cell carcinomas, 1 large cell carcinoma) were entered on 3 DLs. Dose escalation of pemetrexed was conducted up to 600 mg/m2 based on the independent safety monitoring board recommendation. One dose-limiting toxicity occurred at DL3: Grade 4 septic shock. Grade 3 related toxicities: 2 neutropenia at DL3, 2 lymphopenia per DL (3 recurrent), 2 leukopenia (1 recurrent) at DL3, 1 gastric pain (DL3), 1 nausea and 1 recurrent vomiting (DL2). No Grade 3/4 radiation-related toxicities were observed. No toxic death was observed. Disease control rate was 77.7% (1 CR, 4 PR, 2 SD). One-year survival rate was 90%. CONCLUSIONS: This phase I report of pemetrexed is dedicated to NSCLC with induction therapy and fixed high-dose RT. Pemetrexed at 500 mg/m2, concurrently given with cisplatin and RT was well tolerated and appears to be the only third-generation agent that can likely be recommended safely at full dose in future trials with concurrent RT.

A phase II single-arm study of induction chemotherapy with cisplatin and gemcitabine followed by concurrent cisplatin and gemcitabine with thoracic radiation for unresectable locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of the combination of cisplatin-gemcitabine with concurrent thoracic radiotherapy for locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (LA-NSCLC). METHODS: This was a phase II, multicenter, open-label, single-arm trial in treatment-naïve patients with stage IIIA and IIIB LA-NSCLC. After three induction cycles with gemcitabine 1250 mg/m(2) plus cisplatin 80 mg/m(2), two concurrent chemoradiotherapy cycles with gemcitabine 300 mg/m(2), cisplatin 80 mg/m(2), and radiotherapy (63 Gy) were administered. The primary endpoint was response rate after induction chemotherapy followed by concurrent chemoradiotherapy. Secondary endpoints included time to progressive disease (TtPD), overall survival (OS), and safety. RESULTS: Overall, 49 patients (median age 63.4 years; 73.5% male; Karnofsky performance status scores of 80, 85, 90, and 100 [16.3%, 2.0%, 49.0%, and 32.7%, respectively]; disease stage IIIA or IIIB 28.6% and 71.4%, respectively) were enrolled and treated. Response rate was 38.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 25.2-53.8%). Median TtPD was 11.4 months (95% CI 9.4-12.9). Median OS was 21.8 months (95% CI 17.5-26.0), with 1- and 2-year survival rates of 70.8% and 43.7%, respectively. Overall, six patients discontinued from study treatment due to adverse events (AEs), of which two were serious AEs. The most relevant grade 3/4 AEs were neutropenia and thrombocytopenia in induction chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy, and grade 3 events related to radiation in acute chemoradiotherapy, e.g. dysphagia, radiation pneumonitis, and radiation esophagitis. CONCLUSIONS: Induction chemotherapy followed by concurrent chemoradiotherapy with gemcitabine (300 mg/m(2)) and cisplatin was associated with acceptable toxicity. The observed median OS time was 21.8 months. Response evaluation was difficult as in many cases it was not possible to differentiate tumor progression from local radiofibrosis.

Pemetrexed and carboplatin, an active option in first-line treatment of elderly patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): a phase II trial.

The synergistic activity of pemetrexed with platinum agents in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and the renal safety of carboplatin suggest a balanced benefit/risk profile for this combination in elderly patients. This multicenter, single-arm, phase II study included 62 patients (≥70 years) with chemonaïve advanced NSCLC, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) 0-1, and assigned to receive 6 cycles of 3-weekly pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2) and carboplatin AUC 5. The primary endpoint was objective tumor response rate (ORR). Sixty-two patients received at least one dose of chemotherapy. Median age was 76.4 years [70.2-86] and all patients had PS 0 (16.1%) or PS 1 (83.9%). Stage IIIb disease in 21% patients and stage IV in 79% patients. Non-squamous cell carcinoma in 66.1% patients (adenocarcinoma 51.6%, large cell carcinoma 8.1%, other 6.5%) and squamous cell carcinoma in 33.9% patients. ORR was 28.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 16.58-43.26), all were partial responses. Stable disease rate was 42.9%. Grade 3/4 toxicities related to study drugs were: asthenia 16.1%, anorexia 4.8%, diarrhea 3.2%, neutropenia 51.6%, leucopenia 30.7%, thrombocytopenia 29%, anemia 19.4%. One related fatal septic shock occurred. In advanced NSCLC, pemetrexed use is restricted to non-squamous histology. The combination pemetrexed-carboplatin could be a valuable treatment option in elderly patients. Neutropenia was the most common toxicity. The ORR is within the range of data reported for pemetrexed-carboplatin in the general NSCLC population (24-31%).

PARAMOUNT: Final overall survival results of the phase III study of maintenance pemetrexed versus placebo immediately after induction treatment with pemetrexed plus cisplatin for advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: In the phase III PARAMOUNT trial, pemetrexed continuation maintenance therapy reduced the risk of disease progression versus placebo (hazard ratio [HR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.49 to 0.79; P < .001). Here we report final overall survival (OS) and updated safety data. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In all, 939 patients with advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) received four cycles of pemetrexed-cisplatin induction therapy; then, 539 patients with no disease progression and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 or 1 were randomly assigned (2:1) to maintenance pemetrexed (500 mg/m(2) on day 1 of 21-day cycles; n = 359) or placebo (n = 180). Log-rank test compared OS between arms as measured from random assignment (α = .0498). RESULTS: The mean number of maintenance cycles was 7.9 (range, one to 44) for pemetrexed and 5.0 (range, one to 38) for placebo. After 397 deaths (pemetrexed, 71%; placebo, 78%) and a median follow-up of 24.3 months for alive patients (95% CI, 23.2 to 25.1 months), pemetrexed therapy resulted in a statistically significant 22% reduction in the risk of death (HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.64 to 0.96; P = .0195; median OS: pemetrexed, 13.9 months; placebo, 11.0 months). Survival on pemetrexed was consistently improved for all patient subgroups, including induction response: complete/partial responders (n = 234) OS HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.59 to 1.11 and stable disease (n = 285) OS HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.57 to 1.01). Postdiscontinuation therapy use was similar: pemetrexed, 64%; placebo, 72%. No new safety findings emerged. Drug-related grade 3 to 4 anemia, fatigue, and neutropenia were significantly higher in pemetrexed-treated patients. CONCLUSION: Pemetrexed continuation maintenance therapy is well-tolerated and offers superior OS compared with placebo, further demonstrating that it is an efficacious treatment strategy for patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC and good performance status who did not progress during pemetrexed-cisplatin induction therapy.

Safety, resource use, and quality of life in paramount: a phase III study of maintenance pemetrexed versus placebo after induction pemetrexed plus cisplatin for advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer.

INTRODUCTION: In a phase III, randomized, double-blind study (PARAMOUNT), maintenance pemetrexed demonstrated significant benefit in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We present safety, resource use, and quality of life (QoL) results. METHODS: After four 21-day cycles of pemetrexed-cisplatin (N = 939), patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC, whose disease had not progressed and who had a performance status of 0/1, were randomized 2:1 (N = 539) to maintenance pemetrexed 500 mg/m plus best supportive care or placebo plus best supportive care every 21 days until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. QoL was measured using the EuroQol 5-dimensional questionnaire (EQ-5D). RESULTS: Frequently reported grade 3 to 4 drug-related toxicities with maintenance pemetrexed versus placebo were anemia (4.5% versus 0.6%; p = 0.016), fatigue (4.2% versus 0.6%; p = 0.016), and neutropenia (3.6% versus 0.0%; p < 0.006). No significant differences in drug-related grade 3 to 5 toxicities were observed with long-term pemetrexed exposure (>6 cycles), except grade 3 to 4 neutropenia, which did not result in increased infections. Patients on maintenance pemetrexed required more transfusions (13.4% versus 5.0%; p = 0.003), granulocyte colony- or granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factors (5.3% versus 0.0%; p <0.001), anti-infectives (25.3% versus 16.7%; p = 0.028), and hospitalizations because of study drug (8.4% versus 3.3%, p = 0.028) than placebo-treated patients did. No significant treatment-by-time interactions, overall treatment differences, or clinically relevant changes from baseline were observed in EQ-5D scores during treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term use of continuation maintenance pemetrexed was well tolerated; resource use was low, corresponding with known pemetrexed toxicities. The EQ-5D results demonstrate that patients tolerate long-term maintenance pemetrexed without worsening QoL.