Trifluridine-Tipiracil and Bevacizumab in Refractory Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: In a previous phase 3 trial, treatment with trifluridine-tipiracil (FTD-TPI) prolonged overall survival among patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Preliminary data from single-group and randomized phase 2 trials suggest that treatment with FTD-TPI in addition to bevacizumab has the potential to extend survival. METHODS: We randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, adult patients who had received no more than two previous chemotherapy regimens for the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer to receive FTD-TPI plus bevacizumab (combination group) or FTD-TPI alone (FTD-TPI group). The primary end point was overall survival. Secondary end points were progression-free survival and safety, including the time to worsening of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance-status score from 0 or 1 to 2 or more (on a scale from 0 to 5, with higher scores indicating greater disability). RESULTS: A total of 246 patients were assigned to each group. The median overall survival was 10.8 months in the combination group and 7.5 months in the FTD-TPI group (hazard ratio for death, 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.49 to 0.77; P<0.001). The median progression-free survival was 5.6 months in the combination group and 2.4 months in the FTD-TPI group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.54; P<0.001). The most common adverse events in both groups were neutropenia, nausea, and anemia. No treatment-related deaths were reported. The median time to worsening of the ECOG performance-status score from 0 or 1 to 2 or more was 9.3 months in the combination group and 6.3 months in the FTD-TPI group (hazard ratio, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.67). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer, treatment with FTD-TPI plus bevacizumab resulted in longer overall survival than FTD-TPI alone. (Funded by Servier and Taiho Oncology; SUNLIGHT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04737187; EudraCT number, 2020-001976-14.).

Alpelisib for PIK3CA-Mutated, Hormone Receptor-Positive Advanced Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: PIK3CA mutations occur in approximately 40% of patients with hormone receptor (HR)-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative breast cancer. The PI3Kα-specific inhibitor alpelisib has shown antitumor activity in early studies. METHODS: In a randomized, phase 3 trial, we compared alpelisib (at a dose of 300 mg per day) plus fulvestrant (at a dose of 500 mg every 28 days and once on day 15) with placebo plus fulvestrant in patients with HR-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer who had received endocrine therapy previously. Patients were enrolled into two cohorts on the basis of tumor-tissue PIK3CA mutation status. The primary end point was progression-free survival, as assessed by the investigator, in the cohort with PIK3CA-mutated cancer; progression-free survival was also analyzed in the cohort without PIK3CA-mutated cancer. Secondary end points included overall response and safety. RESULTS: A total of 572 patients underwent randomization, including 341 patients with confirmed tumor-tissue PIK3CA mutations. In the cohort of patients with PIK3CA-mutated cancer, progression-free survival at a median follow-up of 20 months was 11.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 7.5 to 14.5) in the alpelisib-fulvestrant group, as compared with 5.7 months (95% CI, 3.7 to 7.4) in the placebo-fulvestrant group (hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.85; P<0.001); in the cohort without PIK3CA-mutated cancer, the hazard ratio was 0.85 (95% CI, 0.58 to 1.25; posterior probability of hazard ratio <1.00, 79.4%). Overall response among all the patients in the cohort without PIK3CA-mutated cancer was greater with alpelisib-fulvestrant than with placebo-fulvestrant (26.6% vs. 12.8%); among patients with measurable disease in this cohort, the percentages were 35.7% and 16.2%, respectively. In the overall population, the most frequent adverse events of grade 3 or 4 were hyperglycemia (36.6% in the alpelisib-fulvestrant group vs. 0.7% in the placebo-fulvestrant group) and rash (9.9% vs. 0.3%). Diarrhea of grade 3 occurred in 6.7% of patients in the alpelisib-fulvestrant group, as compared with 0.3% of those in the placebo-fulvestrant group; no diarrhea of grade 4 was reported. The percentages of patients who discontinued alpelisib and placebo owing to adverse events were 25.0% and 4.2%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with alpelisib-fulvestrant prolonged progression-free survival among patients with PIK3CA-mutated, HR-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer who had received endocrine therapy previously. (Funded by Novartis Pharmaceuticals; SOLAR-1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02437318.).

Exploratory analysis of tumor imaging in a Phase 2 trial with cabozantinib in gastrointestinal stromal tumor: lessons learned from study EORTC STBSG 1317 'CaboGIST'.

BACKGROUND: Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) are malignant mesenchymal tumors arising in the gastrointestinal tract. Their systemic treatment is based on the use of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) with imatinib, sunitinib, and regorafenib being the preferred agents. Assessment of tumor response to TKI treatment in GISTs is traditionally done according the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), while Choi criteria have also been proposed as alternative tool assessing both volumetric and density changes on computer tomography (CT) scans. EORTC STBSG 1317 'CaboGIST' was a single-arm prospective Phase 2 trial which met its primary endpoint, as 60% of patients previously treated with imatinib and sunitinib were progression-free at 12 weeks (95% CI 45-74%) based on local RECIST assessment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We report here an exploratory analysis of local versus central RECIST version 1.1 assessment and a comparison of RECIST version 1.1 versus Choi criteria. RESULTS: Comparisons between local and central RECIST version 1.1 at week 12 revealed discrepancies in 17/43 evaluable cases (39.5%). When comparing Choi with local and central RECIST version 1.1, discrepancies were observed in 27/43 (62.8%) and 21/43 (48.8%) cases, respectively. A total of 68% of evaluable patients were progression-free and alive at week 12 based on local RECIST, 84% according to central RECIST analysis and 81% when applying Choi criteria. Central assessment upgraded the treatment response both with RECIST version 1.1 and Choi. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this exploratory analysis support the conclusion that cabozantinib is active in patients with metastatic or recurrent GIST after treatment with imatinib and sunitinib and confirm once again the limitations of RECIST to capture response to TKI in GIST, and the importance to include density changes in the response evaluation in this setting. Clinical trial number: EORTC 1317, NCT02216578.

Phase I study assessing the mass balance, pharmacokinetics, and excretion of [14C]-pevonedistat, a NEDD8-activating enzyme inhibitor in patients with advanced solid tumors.

Pevonedistat (TAK-924/MLN4924) is an investigational small-molecule inhibitor of the NEDD8-activating enzyme that has demonstrated preclinical and clinical activity across solid tumors and hematological malignancies. Here we report the results of a phase I trial characterizing the mass balance, pharmacokinetics, and clearance pathways of [14C]-pevonedistat in patients with advanced solid tumors (NCT03057366). In part A (n = 8), patients received a single 1-h intravenous infusion of [14C]-pevonedistat 25 mg/m2. In part B (n = 7), patients received pevonedistat 25 or 20 mg/m2 on days 1, 3, and 5 in combination with, respectively, docetaxel 75 mg/m2 or carboplatin AUC5 plus paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 on day 1 every 3 weeks. Following the single dose of [14C]-pevonedistat 25 mg/m2 in part A, there was a parallel log-linear decline in plasma and whole blood pevonedistat concentration, with systemic exposure of unchanged pevonedistat representing 41% of drug-related material (i.e., unchanged pevonedistat and its metabolites). The mean terminal half-life of pevonedistat and drug-related material in plasma was 8.4 and 15.6 h, respectively. Pevonedistat distributed preferentially in whole blood with a mean whole-blood-to-plasma ratio for pevonedistat AUC∞ of 40.8. By 1 week post dose, the mean recovery of administered radioactivity was 94% (41% in urine and 53% in feces). The pevonedistat safety profile during both study parts was consistent with previous clinical experience, with no new safety signals observed. In part B, pevonedistat in combination with docetaxel or carboplatin plus paclitaxel was generally well tolerated. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03057366 .

Lurbinectedin versus pegylated liposomal doxorubicin or topotecan in patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer: A multicenter, randomized, controlled, open-label phase 3 study (CORAIL).

OBJECTIVE: The randomized phase 3 CORAIL trial evaluated whether lurbinectedin improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared to pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) or topotecan in patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to lurbinectedin 3.2 mg/m2 1-h i.v. infusion q3wk (experimental arm), versus PLD 50 mg/m2 1-h i.v. infusion q4wk or topotecan 1.50 mg/m2 30-min i.v. infusion Days 1-5 q3wk (control arm). Stratification factors were PS (0 vs. ≥1), prior PFI (1-3 months vs. >3 months), and prior chemotherapy lines (1-2 vs. 3). The primary endpoint was PFS by Independent Review Committee in all randomized patients. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02421588. RESULTS: 442 patients were randomized: 221 in lurbinectedin arm and 221 in control arm (127 PLD and 94 topotecan). With a median follow-up of 25.6 months, median PFS was 3.5 months (95% CI, 2.1-3.7) in the lurbinectedin arm and 3.6 months (95% CI, 2.7-3.8) in the control arm (stratified log-rank p = 0.6294; HR = 1.057). Grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were most frequent in the control arm: 64.8% vs. 47.9% (p = 0.0005), mainly due to hematological toxicities. The most common grade ≥ 3 AEs were: fatigue (7.3% of patients) and nausea (5.9%) with lurbinectedin; mucosal inflammation (8.5%) and fatigue (8.0%) in the control arm. CONCLUSIONS: The primary endpoint of improvement in PFS was not met. Lurbinectedin showed similar antitumor efficacy and was better tolerated than current standard of care in patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer.

Evaluation of absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion of [14C]-rucaparib, a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor, in patients with advanced solid tumors.

Rucaparib, a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor, is licensed for use in recurrent ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer. We characterized the absorption, distribution, metabolism, and elimination of rucaparib in 6 patients with advanced solid tumors following a single oral dose of [14C]-rucaparib 600 mg (≈140 µCi). Total radioactivity (TRA) in blood, plasma, urine, and feces was measured using liquid scintillation counting. Unchanged rucaparib concentrations in plasma were determined using validated liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry. Maximum concentration (Cmax) of TRA and unchanged rucaparib in plasma was 880 ng Eq/mL and 428 ng/mL, respectively, at approximately 4 h post dose; terminal half-life was >25 h for both TRA and rucaparib. The plasma TRA-time profile was parallel to yet higher than that of rucaparib, suggesting the presence of metabolites in plasma. Mean blood:plasma ratio of radioactivity was 1.0 for Cmax and 0.8 for area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity. Mean postdose recovery of TRA was 89.3% over 12 days (71.9% in feces; 17.4% in urine). Unchanged rucaparib and M324 (oxidative metabolite) were the major components in plasma, contributing to 64.0% and 18.6% of plasma radioactivity, respectively. Rucaparib and M324 were the major rucaparib-related components (each ≈7.6% of dose) in urine, whereas rucaparib was the predominant component (63.9% of dose) in feces. The high fecal recovery of unchanged rucaparib could be attributed to hepatic excretion and/or incomplete oral absorption. Overall, these data suggest that rucaparib is eliminated through multiple pathways, including metabolism and renal and biliary excretion.

Effect of Doxorubicin Plus Olaratumab vs Doxorubicin Plus Placebo on Survival in Patients With Advanced Soft Tissue Sarcomas: The ANNOUNCE Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma (STS) have a median overall survival of less than 2 years. In a phase 2 study, an overall survival benefit in this population was observed with the addition of olaratumab to doxorubicin over doxorubicin alone. Objective: To determine the efficacy of doxorubicin plus olaratumab in patients with advanced/metastatic STS. Design, Setting, and Participants: ANNOUNCE was a confirmatory, phase 3, double-blind, randomized trial conducted at 110 sites in 25 countries from September 2015 to December 2018; the final date of follow-up was December 5, 2018. Eligible patients were anthracycline-naive adults with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic STS, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 1, and cardiac ejection fraction of 50% or greater. Interventions: Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive doxorubicin, 75 mg/m2 (day 1), combined with olaratumab (n = 258), 20 mg/kg in cycle 1 and 15 mg/kg in subsequent cycles, or placebo (n = 251) on days 1 and 8 for up to 8 21-day cycles, followed by olaratumab/placebo monotherapy. Main Outcomes and Measures: Dual primary end points were overall survival with doxorubicin plus olaratumab vs doxorubicin plus placebo in total STS and leiomyosarcoma (LMS) populations. Results: Among the 509 patients randomized (mean age, 56.9 years; 58.2% women; 46.0% with LMS), all were included in the primary analysis and had a median length of follow-up of 31 months. No statistically significant difference in overall survival was observed between the doxorubicin plus olaratumab group vs the doxorubicin plus placebo group in either population (total STS: hazard ratio, 1.05 [95% CI, 0.84-1.30], P = .69, median overall survival, 20.4 months vs 19.7 months; LMS: hazard ratio, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.69-1.31], P = .76, median overall survival, 21.6 months vs 21.9 months). Adverse events of grade 3 or greater reported in 15% or more of total patients with STS were neutropenia (46.3% vs 49.0%), leukopenia (23.3% vs 23.7%), and febrile neutropenia (17.5% vs 16.5%). Conclusions and Relevance: In this phase 3 clinical trial of patients with advanced STS, treatment with doxorubicin plus olaratumab vs doxorubicin plus placebo resulted in no significant difference in overall survival. The findings did not confirm the overall survival benefit observed in the phase 2 trial. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02451943.

Primary cardiac angiosarcoma: A case report.

Cardiac angiosarcomas are the most common primary malignant cardiac tumors in adults. The diagnosis is often delayed due to nonspecific clinical symptoms at presentation. The cornerstones of diagnosis are echocardiography and the histological evaluation of the cardiac biopsy. The knowledge on the treatment is limited; the outcomes of chemotherapy, radiotherapy, complete surgical removal, and heart transplantation are controversial. We report a 38-year-old woman with a primary heart tumor which infiltrated the right atrial wall and the pericardium and caused pericardial effusion. Angiosarcoma was verified histologically. The surgical excision could not be radical, and the patient died 3 months from diagnosis.

[Doege-Potter syndrome with giant malignant solitary fibrous tumour of the pleura]. / Doege­Potter-szindróma a mellhártya óriás malignus szoliter fibrosus tumorával.

Infrequent solitary fibrous tumours of the pleura are associated with hypoglycaemia only in a few percent of the cases; this condition is called Doege-Potter syndrome, named after its first descriptors. Our 63 years old male patient has previously undergone clinical treatment for intrathoracic fluid accumulation on the left side caused by a giant tumour-like mass in the lower left lobe detected by CT scan. In the course of further investigations performed due to increasing load-induced dyspnoea, lung core biopsy verified low grade sarcoma in the tumour. Tumour board suggested surgery. The patient was transferred from the intensive care unit into the operation theater due to increasing dyspnoea and repeated hypoglycaemic periods in rapidly worsening general condition. Pneumonectomy and removal of the tumour was performed on the left side. Histology showed solitary fibrous tumour of the pleura corresponding to Doege-Potter syndrome. The patient was discharged without complications and underwent adjuvant chemotherapy due to pleural dissemination of the tumour observed intraoperatively. One year after surgery the patient underwent surgical removal of a locally recurrent tumour. In spite of repeated chemotherapy local and multiplex contralateral pulmonary progression was observed. Three-year survival was noted from the time of the first surgery. Orv Hetil. 2018; 159(41): 149-153.

Doxorubicin plus evofosfamide versus doxorubicin alone in locally advanced, unresectable or metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma (TH CR-406/SARC021): an international, multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Evofosfamide is a hypoxia-activated prodrug of bromo-isophosphoramide mustard. We aimed to assess the benefit of adding evofosfamide to doxorubicin as first-line therapy for advanced soft-tissue sarcomas. METHODS: We did this international, open-label, randomised, phase 3, multicentre trial (TH CR-406/SARC021) at 81 academic or community investigational sites in 13 countries. Eligible patients were aged 15 years or older with a diagnosis of an advanced unresectable or metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma, of intermediate or high grade, for which no standard curative therapy was available, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, and measurable disease by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive doxorubicin alone (75 mg/m2 via bolus injection administered over 5-20 min or continuous intravenous infusion for 6-96 h on day 1 of every 21-day cycle for up to six cycles) or doxorubicin (given via the same dose procedure) plus evofosfamide (300 mg/m2 intravenously for 30-60 min on days 1 and 8 of every 21-day cycle for up to six cycles). After six cycles of treatment, patients in the single-drug doxorubicin group were followed up expectantly whereas patients with stable or responsive disease in the combination group were allowed to continue with evofosfamide monotherapy until documented disease progression. A web-based central randomisation with block sizes of two and four was stratified by extent of disease, doxorubicin administration method, and previous systemic therapy. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was overall survival, analysed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety analyses were done in all patients who received any amount of study drug. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01440088. FINDINGS: Between Sept 26, 2011, and Jan 22, 2014, 640 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to a treatment group (317 to doxorubicin plus evofosfamide and 323 to doxorubicin alone), all of whom were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. The overall survival endpoint was not reached (hazard ratio 1·06, 95% CI 0·88-1·29; p=0·527), with a median overall survival of 18·4 months (95% CI 15·6-22·1) with doxorubicin plus evofosfamide versus 19·0 months (16·2-22·4) with doxorubicin alone. The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events in both groups were haematological, including anaemia (150 [48%] of 313 patients in the doxorubicin plus evofosfamide group vs 65 [21%] of 308 in the doxorubicin group), neutropenia (47 [15%] vs 92 [30%]), febrile neutropenia (57 [18%] vs 34 [11%]), leucopenia (22 [7%] vs 17 [6%]), decreased neutrophil count (31 [10%] vs 41 [13%]), and decreased white blood cell count (39 [13%] vs 33 [11%]). Grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia was more common in the combination group (45 [14%]) than in the doxorubicin alone group (four [1%]), as was grade 3-4 stomatitis (26 [8%] vs seven [2%]). Serious adverse events were reported in 145 (46%) of 313 patients in the combination group and 99 (32%) of 308 in the doxorubicin alone group. Five (2%) patients died from treatment-related causes in the combination group (sepsis [n=2], septic shock [n=1], congestive cardiac failure [n=1], and unknown cause [n=1]) versus one (<1%) patient in the doxorubicin alone group (lactic acidosis [n=1]). INTERPRETATION: The addition of evofosfamide to doxorubicin as first-line therapy did not improve overall survival compared with single-drug doxorubicin in patients with locally advanced, unresectable, or metastatic soft-tissue sarcomas and so this combination cannot be recommended in this setting. FUNDING: Threshold Pharmaceuticals.

Epigenetic regulation of SMARCB1 By miR-206, -381 and -671-5p is evident in a variety of SMARCB1 immunonegative soft tissue sarcomas, while miR-765 appears specific for epithelioid sarcoma. A miRNA study of 223 soft tissue sarcomas.

Complete/partial loss of SMARCB1 nuclear-immunopositivity is characteristic of a certain subset of soft tissue sarcomas (STSs). Our previous work showed that oncomiRs-206,-381, and 671-5p could silence the SMARCB1 mRNA and protein expression and that they display significant overexpression in epithelioid sarcomas (ESs). MiR-765 was overexpressed too, but functionally was inactive in the silencing. In the current work, using quantitative PCR, we conducted a miRNA study of 51 ESs, 20 rhabdoid tumors (RTs), 20 synovial sarcomas (SSs), 15 malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors (MPNSTs), 11 myoepithelial carcinomas (MECs), and 10 extraskeletal myxoid chondrosarcomas (EMCSs) with complete/partial loss of SMARCB1 nuclear immunostain, in contrast to controls (SMARCB1-immunopositive) of 96 STSs, 13 melanomas and 10 sarcomatoid carcinomas. The SMARCB1 genetic status of ESs was determined by MLPA and FISH. A subset of ESs (5/51) showed biallelic deletion of SMARCB1 with no overexpression of any miRNA, suggesting these tumors could be the counterpart of pediatric RT, at least genetically. Another subset (5/51) was genetically either intact or monoallelic deleted with at least threefold overexpression of one of miR-206,-381,-671-5p, suggesting epigenetic regulation only. 39/51 ESs had a biallelic deletion (>20% by FISH and/or by MLPA) but with overexpressed miR-206,-381, and 671-5p, suggesting intratumoral heterogeneity, i.e., both genetic and epigenetic regulation. At least threefold overexpression of one of miR-206,-381, and 671-5p was detected in all MPNSTs, EMCSs, SSs and 7 MCs. Except for ESs, four SSs and one MPNST, there was no event above threefold overexpression of miR-765 among all 195 tested tumors. Our results suggest a general role of miR-206,-381, and 671-5p in SMARCB1 gene silencing of ES, MC, EMCS, MPNST and SS. In the future, miR-765 could possibly be a diagnostic tool for ES because of its 97% specificity and 80% sensitivity. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Comparison of MAPIE versus MAP in patients with a poor response to preoperative chemotherapy for newly diagnosed high-grade osteosarcoma (EURAMOS-1): an open-label, international, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: We designed the EURAMOS-1 trial to investigate whether intensified postoperative chemotherapy for patients whose tumour showed a poor response to preoperative chemotherapy (≥10% viable tumour) improved event-free survival in patients with high-grade osteosarcoma. METHODS: EURAMOS-1 was an open-label, international, phase 3 randomised, controlled trial. Consenting patients with newly diagnosed, resectable, high-grade osteosarcoma aged 40 years or younger were eligible for randomisation. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either postoperative cisplatin, doxorubicin, and methotrexate (MAP) or MAP plus ifosfamide and etoposide (MAPIE) using concealed permuted blocks with three stratification factors: trial group; location of tumour (proximal femur or proximal humerus vs other limb vs axial skeleton); and presence of metastases (no vs yes or possible). The MAP regimen consisted of cisplatin 120 mg/m2, doxorubicin 37·5 mg/m2 per day on days 1 and 2 (on weeks 1 and 6) followed 3 weeks later by high-dose methotrexate 12 g/m2 over 4 h. The MAPIE regimen consisted of MAP as a base regimen, with the addition of high-dose ifosfamide (14 g/m2) at 2·8 g/m2 per day with equidose mesna uroprotection, followed by etoposide 100 mg/m2 per day over 1 h on days 1-5. The primary outcome measure was event-free survival measured in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00134030. FINDINGS: Between April 14, 2005, and June 30, 2011, 2260 patients were registered from 325 sites in 17 countries. 618 patients with poor response were randomly assigned; 310 to receive MAP and 308 to receive MAPIE. Median follow-up was 62·1 months (IQR 46·6-76·6); 62·3 months (IQR 46·9-77·1) for the MAP group and 61·1 months (IQR 46·5-75·3) for the MAPIE group. 307 event-free survival events were reported (153 in the MAP group vs 154 in the MAPIE group). 193 deaths were reported (101 in the MAP group vs 92 in the MAPIE group). Event-free survival did not differ between treatment groups (hazard ratio [HR] 0·98 [95% CI 0·78-1·23]); hazards were non-proportional (p=0·0003). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (268 [89%] patients in MAP vs 268 [90%] in MAPIE), thrombocytopenia (231 [78% in MAP vs 248 [83%] in MAPIE), and febrile neutropenia without documented infection (149 [50%] in MAP vs 217 [73%] in MAPIE). MAPIE was associated with more frequent grade 4 non-haematological toxicity than MAP (35 [12%] of 301 in the MAP group vs 71 [24%] of 298 in the MAPIE group). Two patients died during postoperative therapy, one from infection (although their absolute neutrophil count was normal), which was definitely related to their MAP treatment (specifically doxorubicin and cisplatin), and one from left ventricular systolic dysfunction, which was probably related to MAPIE treatment (specifically doxorubicin). One suspected unexpected serious adverse reaction was reported in the MAP group: bone marrow infarction due to methotrexate. INTERPRETATION: EURAMOS-1 results do not support the addition of ifosfamide and etoposide to postoperative chemotherapy in patients with poorly responding osteosarcoma because its administration was associated with increased toxicity without improving event-free survival. The results define standard of care for this population. New strategies are required to improve outcomes in this setting. FUNDING: UK Medical Research Council, National Cancer Institute, European Science Foundation, St Anna Kinderkrebsforschung, Fonds National de la Recherche Scientifique, Fonds voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek-Vlaanderen, Parents Organization, Danish Medical Research Council, Academy of Finland, Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Deutsche Krebshilfe, Federal Ministry of Education and Research, Semmelweis Foundation, ZonMw (Council for Medical Research), Research Council of Norway, Scandinavian Sarcoma Group, Swiss Paediatric Oncology Group, Cancer Research UK, National Institute for Health Research, University College London Hospitals, and Biomedical Research Centre.

Nilotinib versus imatinib as first-line therapy for patients with unresectable or metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumours (ENESTg1): a randomised phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Nilotinib inhibits the tyrosine kinase activity of ABL1/BCR-ABL1 and KIT, platelet-derived growth factor receptors (PDGFRs), and the discoidin domain receptor. Gain-of-function mutations in KIT or PDGFRα are key drivers in most gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GISTs). This trial was designed to test the efficacy and safety of nilotinib versus imatinib as first-line therapy for patients with advanced GISTs. METHODS: In this randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 3 trial (ENESTg1), participants from academic centres were aged 18 years or older and had previously untreated, histologically confirmed, metastatic or unresectable GISTs. Patients were stratified by previous adjuvant therapy and randomly assigned (1:1) via a randomisation list to receive oral imatinib 400 mg once daily or oral nilotinib 400 mg twice daily. The primary endpoint was centrally reviewed progression-free survival. Efficacy endpoints were assessed by intention-to-treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00785785. FINDINGS: Because the futility boundary was crossed at a preplanned interim analysis, trial accrual terminated in April, 2011. Between March 16, 2009, and April 21, 2011, 647 patients were enrolled; of whom 324 were allocated nilotinib and 320 were allocated imatinib. At final analysis of the core study (data cutoff, October, 2012), 2-year progression-free survival was higher in the imatinib group (59·2% [95% CI 50·9-66·5]) than in the nilotinib group (51·6% [43·0-59·5]; hazard ratio 1·47 [95% CI 1·10-1·95]). In the imatinib group, the most common grade 3-4 adverse events were hypophosphataemia (19 [6%]), anaemia (17 [5%]), abdominal pain (13; 4%), and elevated lipase level (15; 5%), and in the nilotinib group were anaemia (18; 6%), elevated lipase level (15; 5%), elevated alanine aminotransferase concentration (12; 4%), and abdominal pain (11; 3%). The most common serious adverse event in both groups was abdominal pain (11 [4%] in the imatinib group, 14 [4%] in the nilotinib group). INTERPRETATION: Nilotinib cannot be recommended for broad use to treat first-line GIST. However, future studies might identify patient subsets for whom first-line nilotinib could be of clinical benefit. FUNDING: Novartis Pharmaceuticals.

Ombrabulin plus cisplatin versus placebo plus cisplatin in patients with advanced soft-tissue sarcomas after failure of anthracycline and ifosfamide chemotherapy: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Ombrabulin (AVE8062) disrupts the vasculature of established tumours and has shown preclinical synergistic anti-tumour activity when combined with cisplatin. In this phase 3 trial, we aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of ombrabulin plus cisplatin compared with placebo plus cisplatin in patients with advanced soft-tissue sarcomas. METHODS: We did this multinational, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 study at 44 centres in ten countries. Patients aged 18 years and older with metastatic soft-tissue sarcomas, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, and who had previously received treatment with anthracycline and ifosfamide were randomly assigned (1:1) to intravenous infusion of ombrabulin 25 mg/m(2) plus cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) or intravenous infusion of placebo plus cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks. Patients were allocated to treatment using a permuted blocks randomisation scheme (block size of four) via an interactive voice-response system, and stratified by histological subtype. Patients, medical staff, study investigators, and individuals who handled and analysed the data were masked to treatment assignment. Our primary endpoint was median progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Safety analyses were done on all randomised patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This trial is now closed, and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00699517. FINDINGS: Between June 13, 2008, and April 26, 2012, we randomly assigned 355 patients to ombrabulin plus cisplatin (n=176) or placebo plus cisplatin (n=179). Median duration of follow-up was 27·9 (IQR 20·9-33·2) in the placebo group and 30·5 months (20·7-37·6) in the ombrabulin group. Progression-free survival was slightly, but significantly, improved in the ombrabulin group compared with the placebo group (median 1·54 months [95% CI 1·45-2·69] vs 1·41 [1·38-1·58] months; hazard ratio 0·76 [95% CI 0·59-0·98]; p=0·0302). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred more frequently in individuals in the ombrabulin group than in those in the placebo group and included neutropenia (34 [19%] in the ombrabulin group vs 14 [8%] in the placebo group) and thrombocytopenia (15 [8%] vs six [3%] for placebo). Adverse events leading to death occurred in 18 patients in the ombrabulin group and 10 patients in the placebo group. INTERPRETATION: The combination of ombrabulin and cisplatin significantly improved progression-free survival; however, it did not show a sufficient clinical benefit in patients with advanced soft-tissue sarcomas to support its use as a therapeutic option. Predictive biomarkers are needed for the rational clinical development of tumour vascular-disrupting drugs for soft-tissue sarcomas. FUNDING: Sanofi.

Everolimus for women with trastuzumab-resistant, HER2-positive, advanced breast cancer (BOLERO-3): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Disease progression in patients with HER2-positive breast cancer receiving trastuzumab might be associated with activation of the PI3K/Akt/mTOR intracellular signalling pathway. We aimed to assess whether the addition of the mTOR inhibitor everolimus to trastuzumab might restore sensitivity to trastuzumab. METHODS: In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial, we recruited women with HER2-positive, trastuzumab-resistant, advanced breast carcinoma who had previously received taxane therapy. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using a central patient screening and randomisation system to daily everolimus (5 mg/day) plus weekly trastuzumab (2 mg/kg) and vinorelbine (25 mg/m(2)) or to placebo plus trastuzumab plus vinorelbine, in 3-week cycles, stratified by previous lapatinib use. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) by local assessment in the intention-to-treat population. We report the final analysis for PFS; overall survival follow-up is still in progress. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01007942. FINDINGS: Between Oct 26, 2009, and May 23, 2012, 569 patients were randomly assigned to everolimus (n=284) or placebo (n=285). Median follow-up at the time of analysis was 20.2 months (IQR 15.0-27.1). Median PFS was 7.00 months (95% CI 6.74-8.18) with everolimus and 5.78 months (5.49-6.90) with placebo (hazard ratio 0.78 [95% CI 0.65-0.95]; p=0.0067). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (204 [73%] of 280 patients in the everolimus group vs 175 [62%] of 282 patients in the placebo group), leucopenia (106 [38%] vs 82 [29%]), anaemia (53 [19%] vs 17 [6%]), febrile neutropenia (44 [16%] vs ten [4%]), stomatitis (37 [13%] vs four [1%]), and fatigue (34 [12%] vs 11 [4%]). Serious adverse events were reported in 117 (42%) patients in the everolimus group and 55 (20%) in the placebo group; two on-treatment deaths due to adverse events occurred in each group. INTERPRETATION: The addition of everolimus to trastuzumab plus vinorelbine significantly prolongs PFS in patients with trastuzumab-resistant and taxane-pretreated, HER2-positive, advanced breast cancer. The clinical benefit should be considered in the context of the adverse event profile in this population.

[Treatment of metastatic midgut neuroendocrine tumour associated with carcinoid syndrome]. / Carcinoid szindrómával társuló metasztatikus középbél-eredetu neuroendokrin tumor kezelése.

Although the incidence of neuroendocrine tumours is low, their prevalence is high due to the usually slow course of the disease. Between July 1, 2008 and July 1, 2013 the authors evaluated 56 patients with well-differentiated or moderately differentiated neuroendocrine tumours; 36 patients with metastatic disease underwent treatment while 17 patients who had tumour resection were followed without additional treatment. All patients with metastatic disease received long acting octreotide, and additional therapy was based on the site of origin, grade of differentiation, Ki67 index, and focal labelling of the tumours during somatostatin-receptor or metaiodo-benzyl-guanidine scintigraphy. The authors present a detailed case history of a patient with carcinoid syndrome due to a metastatic midgut neuroendocrine tumour, who received long acting octreotide and peptide receptor radionuclide treatment. In this patient an objective tumour response was reached in addition to the resolution of symptoms of carcinoid syndrome. The authors conclude that the case history confirms previous observations showing that long acting octreotide combined with peptide receptor radionuclide treatment may provide long survival with good quality of life in a patient with metastatic midgut neuroendocrine tumour accompanied with carcinoid syndrome. Orv. Hetil., 2014, 155(5), 194-198.

[Medical treatment of soft tissue sarcomas based on the histological subtype]. / Lágyrészsarcomák gyógyszeres kezelési lehetõségei a szövettani altípus alapján.

The medical treatment of adult soft tissue sarcomas is more and more dictated by the histological subtype, this applies to both cytotoxics and target therapies. Doxorubicin and ifosfamid are the two drugs used either in monotherapy or combination with the best established response rates in adult soft tissue sarcomas for several years. In addition to these compounds there is evidence of efficacy of new drugs such as taxanes in angiosarcoma, gemcitabine+taxanes combination in leiomyosarcomas, trabectedin in leiomyosarcomas and liposarcomas with an extremely high activity in myxoid liposarcoma. With regard to target therapy pazopanib seems especially active in leiomyosarcomas and synoviosarcomas, but totally inactive in liposarcomas, sunitinib and cediranib in alveolar soft part sarcomas, sunitinib and bevacizumab+temozolamide combination in solitary fibrous tumors, and sorafenib in angiosarcomas. mTOR inhibitors are active in PEComas (perivascular epitheloid cell tumors) and crizotinib in ALK rearranged inflammatory myofibroblastic tumors. The efficacy of imatinib and sunitinib in GIST tumors are established, and that of imatinib in dermatofibrosarcoma as well.

[Rare hereditary tumours]. / Ritka örökletes daganatok.

Almost 5-10% of all tumours are hereditary, which manifest in tumour syndrome or neoplasmic complication of a genetic disease. We present a short introduction of some of these rare diseases through our patients with the aspect of the clinical signs, diversities and challenges. These cases indicate that the incidency of malignancies are increased at genetic diseases, it means even multiple neoplasms in the same patient. The therapy does not differ from the ordinary tumour's therapy and the results are nearly the same as in cases without genetic diseases.

[Surgical treatment of retroperitoneal sarcomas]. / A retroperitoneális sarcomák sebészi kezelése.

Retroperitoneal sarcomas make up 0.15% of all solid tumors. The mainstay of their treatment is surgical resection, though the removal of the often sizable tumors may pose serious challenge to surgeons. There is no clear-cut recommendation for neoadjuvant, nor for adjuvant treatment so far. We collected the data and recommendations concerning the attributes and the treatment options for retroperitoneal sarcomas. Mainly we focused on the possibilities and the recent change in tactics of surgery. There is no prospective randomized study dealing with surgical treatment of retroperitoneal sarcomas. According to data in the literature the en-block R0 resection along with all the possibly involved neighboring organs offers the best chance for cure. The greatest problem is to define the required resection margin which is needed for R0 resection. Radio- and/or chemotherapy can be used for diminishing the possibility of tumor recurrence. The greatest risk factors for recurrence are incomplete resection, high grade tumor, and non-liposarcoma type histology. Survival depends on local recurrence rather than on distant metastases. Retroperitoneal sarcomas are ideally treated in sarcoma centers, where multidisciplinary consultation is available and complex treatment plans can be set. Complete recovery can be achieved with radical surgical excision. The chance for R0 resection is enhanced by chemo- and radiotherapy.

[Resection and reconstruction in cases of musculosceletal soft tissue sarcomas]. / Sebészi radikalitás és rekonstrukciós lehetõségek végtagi lágyrészsarcomáknál.

Soft tissue sarcomas are rare, reaching some 1.5% of all malignant tumors. While formerly the surgical management of sarcomas almost exclusively consisted of amputation, in the recent years limb saving surgery has become the first choice of therapy. Negative factors affecting the survival rate are: histologically high-grade tumor, size and localization of the tumor, vascular invasion, extensive tumor necrosis, certain subgroups, local recurrence and oncologically positive surgical margin at the resection. Many modern reconstruction possibilities are essential for the safe limb saving surgery with wide surgical margins, such as bone allograft implantation, tumor endoprostheses reconstruction, vascular grafting and plastic surgery. There should always be an attempt to perform limb saving surgery, however life quality, life expectancy and survival are more important considerations influencing essentially the surgical method of choice. In our follow-up study no significant difference in recurrence rate was found between the group of patients with sarcomas requiring a complex reconstruction procedure and the group of those treated by only resection methods (32% versus 47%).