Vorinostat and bortezomib as third-line therapy in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a Wisconsin Oncology Network Phase II study.

INTRODUCTION: The primary objective of this phase II trial was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of vorinostat and bortezomib as third-line therapy in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. METHODS: Eligibility criteria included recurrent/metastatic NSCLC, having received 2 prior systemic regimens, and performance status 0-2. Patients took vorinostat 400 mg PO daily days 1-14 and bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2 IV day 1, 4, 8 and 11 in a 21-day cycle. Primary endpoint was 3-month progression free survival (3m-PFS), with a goal of at least 40 % of patients being free of progression at that time point. This study followed a two-stage minimax design. RESULTS: Eighteen patients were enrolled in the first stage. All patients had two prior lines of treatment. Patients received a median of two treatment cycles (range: 1-6) on study. There were no anti-tumor responses; stable disease was observed in 5 patients (27.8 %). Median PFS was 1.5 months, 3m-PFS rate 11.1 %, and median overall survival 4.7 months. The most common grade 3/4 toxicities were thrombocytopenia and fatigue. Two patients who had baseline taxane-related grade 1 peripheral neuropathy developed grade 3 neuropathy. The study was closed at its first interim analysis for lack of efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: Bortezomib and vorinostat displayed minimal anti-tumor activity as third-line therapy in NSCLC. We do not recommend this regimen for further investigation in unselected patients.

A phase I study of sorafenib, oxaliplatin and 2 days of high dose capecitabine in advanced pancreatic and biliary tract cancer: a Wisconsin oncology network study.

Chemotherapy has yielded minimal clinical benefit in pancreatic and biliary tract cancer. A high-dose, short course capecitabine schedule with oxaliplatin, has shown some efficacy with a lower incidence of palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia. Achieving high exposures of the targeted agent sorafenib may be possible with this shorter schedule of capecitabine by avoiding dermatologic toxicity. All patients had pancreatic or biliary tract cancer. Patients in both cohorts received oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2 followed by capecitabine 2,250 mg/m2 PO every 8 h x 6 doses starting on days 1 and 15 of a 28 day cycle, or 2DOC (2 Day Oxaliplatin/Capecitabine). Cohort 1 used sorafenib 200 mg BID, and cohort 2 used sorafenib 400 mg BID. Sixteen patients were enrolled. Across all cycles the most common grade 1 or 2 adverse events were fatigue (10 pts), diarrhea (10 pts), nausea (9 pts), vomiting (8 pts), sensory neuropathy (8 pts), thrombocytopenia (7 pts), neutropenia (5 pts), and hand-foot syndrome (5 pts). Grade 3 toxicites included neutropenia, mucositis, fatigue, vomiting and diarrhea. Cohort 1 represented the MTD. Two partial responses were seen, one each in pancreatic and biliary tract cancers. The recommended phase II dose of sorafenib in combination with 2DOC is 200 mg BID. There were infrequent grade 3 toxicities, most evident with sorafenib at 400 mg BID.

Nuclear EGFR protein expression predicts poor survival in early stage non-small cell lung cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Nuclear EGFR (nEGFR) has been identified in various human tumor tissues, including cancers of the breast, ovary, oropharynx, and esophagus, and has predicted poor patient outcomes. We sought to determine if protein expression of nEGFR is prognostic in early stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: Resected stages I and II NSCLC specimens were evaluated for nEGFR protein expression using immunohistochemistry (IHC). Cases with at least one replicate core containing ≥5% of tumor cells demonstrating strong dot-like nucleolar EGFR expression were scored as nEGFR positive. RESULTS: Twenty-three (26.1% of the population) of 88 resected specimens stained positively for nEGFR. Nuclear EGFR protein expression was associated with higher disease stage (45.5% of stage II vs. 14.5% of stage I; p = 0.023), histology (41.7% in squamous cell carcinoma vs. 17.1% in adenocarcinoma; p = 0.028), shorter progression-free survival (PFS) (median PFS 8.7 months [95% CI 5.1-10.7 mo] for nEGFR positive vs. 14.5 months [95% CI 9.5-17.4 mo] for nEGFR negative; hazard ratio (HR) of 1.89 [95% CI 1.15-3.10]; p = 0.011), and shorter overall survival (OS) (median OS 14.1 months [95% CI 10.3-22.7 mo] for nEGFR positive vs. 23.4 months [95% CI 20.1-29.4 mo] for nEGFR negative; HR of 1.83 [95% CI 1.12-2.99]; p = 0.014). CONCLUSIONS: Expression of nEGFR protein was associated with higher stage and squamous cell histology, and predicted shorter PFS and OS, in this patient cohort. Nuclear EGFR serves as a useful independent prognostic variable and as a potential therapeutic target in NSCLC.