Effect of Lanreotide Depot/Autogel on Urinary 5-Hydroxyindoleacetic Acid and Plasma Chromogranin A Biomarkers in Nonfunctional Metastatic Enteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors.

BACKGROUND: Urinary 5-hydroxyindoleacetic acid (5-HIAA) is an established biomarker in neuroendocrine tumors and carcinoid syndrome; however, its role in nonfunctional neuroendocrine tumors is not defined. We present post hoc data on urinary 5-HIAA and plasma chromogranin A (CgA) from the CLARINET study. METHODS: Patients with well- or moderately differentiated, nonfunctioning, locally advanced or metastatic enteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors were randomized to deep subcutaneous lanreotide depot/autogel 120 mg or placebo once every 28 days for 96 weeks. Tumor response, evaluated centrally (RECIST 1.0), and progression-free survival (PFS) were assessed by treatment and biochemical response, defined as (a) baseline >upper limit of normal (ULN, 41.6 µmol per day 5-HIAA; 98.1 µg/L CgA) and (b) ≥50% decrease from baseline and to ≤ULN value on study. RESULTS: Forty-eight percent (82 of 171; lanreotide, n = 45; placebo, n = 37) and 66% (129 of 195; lanreotide, n = 65; placebo, n = 64) of randomized patients had 5-HIAA and CgA > ULN at baseline. Among patients with >ULN baseline values who did not progress after 96 weeks of treatment, significantly greater reductions in 5-HIAA and CgA were observed in lanreotide-treated versus placebo-treated patients throughout the study (all p < .05). PFS was significantly prolonged among 5-HIAA responders versus nonresponders (median not reached vs. 16.2 months, p < .0001; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.21, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.09-0.48) and CgA responders versus nonresponders (median not reached vs. 16.2 months, p = .0070; HR = 0.30, 95% CI, 0.12-0.76), regardless of treatment arm. PFS was also significantly prolonged among lanreotide-treated 5-HIAA responders versus nonresponders (p = .0071) but was not significantly different among placebo-treated 5-HIAA responders versus nonresponders. There were no significant differences in PFS between lanreotide-treated CgA responders versus nonresponders or between placebo-treated CgA responders versus nonresponders. CONCLUSIONS: The 5-HIAA findings are noteworthy because they occurred in patients with nonfunctioning enteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. Monitoring 5-HIAA and CgA may be useful when treating patients with nonfunctional neuroendocrine tumors. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Current guidelines focus only on the monitoring of 5-hydroxyindoleacetic acid (5-HIAA) in the diagnosis and management of functional neuroendocrine tumors with carcinoid syndrome. The current post hoc analysis of patients with nonfunctional enteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors in the CLARINET study demonstrated that measuring and following both 5-HIAA and chromogranin A as biomarkers of disease progression may be useful in the management of patients with nonfunctional neuroendocrine tumors.

Patient-Reported Symptom Control of Diarrhea and Flushing in Patients with Neuroendocrine Tumors Treated with Lanreotide Depot/Autogel: Results from a Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Double-Blind and 32-Week Open-Label Study.

BACKGROUND: In the double-blind (DB) ELECT study, lanreotide depot/autogel significantly reduced versus placebo the need for short-acting octreotide for symptomatic carcinoid syndrome (CS) control in neuroendocrine tumor (NET) patients. Here we present patient-reported symptom data during DB and initial open-label (IOL) treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Adults with NETs and CS history, with/without prior somatostatin analog use, were randomized to 16 weeks' DB lanreotide 120 mg subcutaneous or placebo every 4 weeks, followed by 32 weeks' IOL lanreotide. Patients recorded diarrhea and/or flushing frequency and severity daily by Interactive Voice (Web) Response System for 1 month prior to randomization and throughout the study. RESULTS: Of 115 patients randomized (n = 59 lanreotide, n = 56 placebo), 56 lanreotide and 45 placebo patients enrolled in the IOL phase. During DB treatment, least square (LS) mean percentages of days with moderate/severe diarrhea and/or flushing were significantly lower for lanreotide (23.4%) versus placebo (35.8%; LS mean difference [95% confidence interval]: -12.4 [-20.73 to -4.07]; p = .004). For DB lanreotide patients, average daily composite (frequency × severity) diarrhea scores improved significantly between DB and IOL treatment (mean difference: -0.71 [-1.20 to -0.22]; p = .005), and remained stable for diarrhea and/or flushing. For DB placebo patients, composite scores for diarrhea, flushing, and diarrhea and/or flushing improved significantly between DB and IOL treatment (mean differences: -1.07 [-1.65 to -0.49]; -1.06 [-1.93 to -0.19]; and -2.13 [-3.35 to -0.91]; all p ≤ .018). CONCLUSION: Improved diarrhea and flushing control in CS patients during 16-week lanreotide treatment was sustained during maintenance of lanreotide treatment for the 32-week IOL phase (48 weeks total). IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This study prospectively collected daily patient-reported data on diarrhea and flushing from the ELECT trial to evaluate the direct impact of lanreotide depot on patients' relief of carcinoid syndrome symptoms. Treatment with lanreotide depot was associated with significant reductions in the percentages of days patients reported symptoms of diarrhea and flushing, as well as reductions in the frequency and severity of daily symptoms compared with placebo during 16 weeks of double-blind treatment. These improvements were sustained for 32 additional weeks of open-label lanreotide treatment (i.e., through week 48 of treatment), resulting in clinically meaningful, long-term symptom reduction.

Real-world use of sunitinib in Japanese patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma: efficacy, safety and biomarker analyses in 1689 consecutive patients.

OBJECTIVE: This prospective, post-marketing study collected sunitinib safety and efficacy data in Japanese patients with unresectable/metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Retrospective analysis investigated adverse events as potential sunitinib efficacy biomarkers. METHODS: Patients administered sunitinib, after its release, were registered until reaching a pre-specified number of cases. Primary starting dose was 50 mg/day orally on a 4-weeks-on and 2-weeks-off schedule. Physicians completed investigation forms at 6-week intervals for 24 weeks. Associations between baseline characteristics and adverse events were analyzed by Cox proportional hazards model and compared by χ(2) test. The log-rank test compared survival in subpopulations based on selected factors. RESULTS: Of note, 1689 patients receiving sunitinib were registered between June 2008 and November 2009. Most of them were males (75%), aged <65 years (56%), and had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0/1 (90%), metastatic disease (88%) and previous systemic therapy (66%). Grade ≥ 3 adverse events occurred in 70%, with reduced platelet count the most common (34%). Characteristics significantly associated with Grade ≥ 3 adverse events were female sex, age ≥ 55 years, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≥ 2, history of several medical conditions and prior treatment. Objective response rate was 22%. Median progression-free survival was 22.7 weeks. Median overall survival was not reached; however, 24-week overall survival rate was 84%. Improved overall survival was associated with higher relative dose intensity during the first 6 weeks and specific adverse events: hypertension, hand-foot syndrome, hypothyroidism, leukopenia and thrombocytopenia. CONCLUSIONS: Sunitinib demonstrated acceptable safety and useful efficacy in Japanese patients with unresectable/metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Potential biomarkers associated with greater efficacy were relative dose intensity and specific adverse events.

Treatment Patterns and Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Metastatic Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors Treated in the Community Practice Setting in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: This study was conducted to understand treatment patterns and clinical outcomes in metastatic gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumor patients treated in a large community oncology network. METHODS: This retrospective study used the McKesson Specialty Health/US Oncology Network iKnowMed electronic health record database with supplemental chart review. Eligibility criteria included a metastatic neuroendocrine tumor diagnosis between January 1, 2008, and to December 31, 2012; at least 2 US Oncology Network visits; and age at least 18 years. Follow-up was through October 31, 2014. RESULTS: Among the 229 patients identified, median age was 64.0 years, 52.4% were male, 69.4% were white, and 62.9% were overweight/obese. Primary tumor sites included small bowel (47.6%), pancreas (31.4%), and stomach/colorectum (21.0%). There were 16.2% under observation without treatment, 52.4% received only somatostatin analogs (SSAs), and 31.4% received chemotherapy/targeted therapy during treatment. In the first-line setting (n = 192), 77% received SSAs, 12% received chemotherapy, and 10.9% received targeted therapy. Fifty percent of patients receiving octreotide had a relative dose intensity of less than 85%, and 16.7% received above-label dose. Toxicities of SSAs included diarrhea (18.2%), abdominal pain (16.9%), and fatigue (13.5%). Median overall survival from diagnosis was 68.0 months (95% confidence interval, 57.1 to not reached). CONCLUSIONS: Most metastatic gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumor patients received systemic treatment with SSAs. Patient treatment used an individualized dosing approach. Overall survival and toxicity were consistent with the published literature.

Preparing for tomorrow: molecular diagnostics and the changing nonsmall cell lung cancer landscape.

Over the last 10 to 15 years, the landscape of lung cancer has changed dramatically. Where cancers were previously described rather simplistically according to histological subtype, now molecular understanding of tumors has particularly resulted in segmentation of nonsmall cell lung cancer into many different subtypes. A multidisciplinary approach integrating a molecular testing algorithm that ideally includes reflex testing at diagnosis is recommended. This offers clinicians the opportunity to target treatment according to subtype. Identifying patients with rearrangements, such as those associated with the echinoderm microtubule-associated protein-like 4 (EML-4) anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) fusion gene (the major focus of this paper) has allowed clinicians to tailor therapy to target these mutations. The challenge that faces clinicians treating lung cancer is how best to implement the science that sits behind these targeted therapies in clinical practice through the identification of appropriate patients. Precision medicine can lead to the choice of the right medicine for the right patients and is proving to be a better approach than treating unselected patients with systemic chemotherapy.

Sunitinib in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: an ethnic Asian subpopulation analysis for safety and efficacy.

AIMS: We evaluated and compared the safety and efficacy of sunitinib in Asian and non-Asian patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma enrolled in a previously reported global expanded access program. METHODS: Previously treated and treatment-naïve patients received open-label sunitinib at a starting dose of 50 mg/day for 4 weeks, followed by 2 weeks off treatment, in repeated 6-week cycles. Safety was assessed regularly, tumor measurements were performed per local practice, and survival data collected where possible. RESULTS: Data were available for 212 Asian patients from Asian sites (Asian-A), 113 Asian patients from non-Asian sites (Asian-O) and 4046 non-Asian patients. The most common grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events were neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, hand-foot syndrome, diarrhea, asthenia and fatigue. The incidence of many adverse events was greater in Asian-A than in Asian-O or non-Asian patients. Sunitinib efficacy was comparable between Asian and non-Asian patients, with an objective response rate of 18% versus 14%; median progression-free survival of 8.7 versus 10.9 months; and overall survival of 18.9 versus 18.4 months, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Sunitinib demonstrated tolerable safety and similar efficacy in Asian and non-Asian patients. Geographic differences in the reported frequency of specific adverse events were noted across Asian patients.

National Working Group Meeting on ALK diagnostics in lung cancer.

The global landscape of molecular testing is rapidly changing, with the recent publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC)/College of American Pathologists (CAP) guidelines and the ALK Atlas. The IASLC/CAP guidelines recommend that tumors from patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) be tested for ALK rearrangements in addition to epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations. The spur for this recommendation is the availability of novel therapies that target these rearrangements. This article is based on coverage of a Pfizer-sponsored National Working Group Meeting on ALK Diagnostics in Lung Cancer, held around the 15th World Lung Cancer Conference, in Sydney on October 31, 2013. It is based on the presentations given by the authors at the meeting and the discussion that ensued. The content for this article was discussed and agreed on by the authors.

Sunitinib versus sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular cancer: results of a randomized phase III trial.

PURPOSE: Open-label, phase III trial evaluating whether sunitinib was superior or equivalent to sorafenib in hepatocellular cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were stratified and randomly assigned to receive sunitinib 37.5 mg once per day or sorafenib 400 mg twice per day. Primary end point was overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Early trial termination occurred for futility and safety reasons. A total of 1,074 patients were randomly assigned to the study (sunitinib arm, n = 530; sorafenib arm, n = 544). For sunitinib and sorafenib, respectively, median OS was 7.9 versus 10.2 months (hazard ratio [HR], 1.30; one-sided P = .9990; two-sided P = .0014); median progression-free survival (PFS; 3.6 v 3.0 months; HR, 1.13; one-sided P = .8785; two-sided P = .2286) and time to progression (TTP; 4.1 v 3.8 months; HR, 1.13; one-sided P = .8312; two-sided P = .3082) were comparable. Median OS was similar among Asian (7.7 v 8.8 months; HR, 1.21; one-sided P = .9829) and hepatitis B-infected patients (7.6 v 8.0 months; HR, 1.10; one-sided P = .8286), but was shorter with sunitinib in hepatitis C-infected patients (9.2 v 17.6 months; HR, 1.52; one-sided P = .9835). Sunitinib was associated with more frequent and severe adverse events (AEs) than sorafenib. Common grade 3/4 AEs were thrombocytopenia (29.7%) and neutropenia (25.7%) for sunitinib; hand-foot syndrome (21.2%) for sorafenib. Discontinuations owing to AEs were similar (sunitinib, 13.3%; sorafenib, 12.7%). CONCLUSION: OS with sunitinib was not superior or equivalent but was significantly inferior to sorafenib. OS was comparable in Asian and hepatitis B-infected patients. OS was superior in hepatitis C-infected patients who received sorafenib. Sunitinib-treated patients reported more frequent and severe toxicity.