Phase II clinical trial of paclitaxel loaded polymeric micelle in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer.

PURPOSE: To determine in patients, with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer (APC), efficacy and safety of treatment with intravenous paclitaxel loaded polymeric micelle (GPM). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a multicenter, open-label Phase II study. Patients with APC, ECOG performance status < or = 2, no prior chemotherapy and adequate organ function were treated with 3-hour GPM infusions every 3 weeks. Initial patients were treated with 435 mg/m(2) (n = 11). The dose was reduced for subsequent patients to 350 or 300 mg/m(2) (n = 45). Primary endpoint was time to tumor progression (TTP). RESULTS: 56 patients were enrolled. Median TTP for patients treated with 300 or 350 mg/m(2) doses was 3.2 months (95% CI, 2.6-4.2). Median progression free survival (PFS) was 2.8 months (95% CI, 1.4-4.0). Median overall survival (OS) was 6.5 months (95% CI, 5.1-7.9). Among patients treated with above doses of GPM, there was 1 complete remission (CR) and 2 partial remissions (PR) with an overall response rate (ORR) of 6.7%. Disease control rate (CR + PR + stable disease) was 60.0%. Most common grade 3 toxicities were: neutropenia (40.0%), fatigue (17.8%), infection, dehydration, neuropathy (each 13.3%), and abdominal pain (11.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of APC with GPM at a dose of 300 mg/m(2) q 3 weeks was well tolerated and common toxicities were qualitatively similar to Cremophor-based paclitaxel. GPM monotherapy resulted in OS and other efficacy parameters preferable to that seen historically with gemcitabine. Future studies of GPM in combination with other agents for treatment of APC are warranted.

Sorafenib and continued erlotinib or sorafenib alone in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer progressing on erlotinib: A randomized phase II study of the Sarah Cannon Research Institute (SCRI).

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy of erlotinib, continued after tumor progression, plus sorafenib versus sorafenib alone in patients with refractory metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who previously benefitted from single-agent erlotinib. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with progressive refractory NSCLC who had previously benefitted from erlotinib (objective response or stable disease >8weeks) were randomized to receive treatment with either erlotinib and sorafenib (400mg orally twice daily) or sorafenib alone. Patients were evaluated for response every 8 weeks, and continued treatment until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. RESULTS: Fifty-three patients were randomized (erlotinib/sorafenib, 25; sorafenib, 28) and 52 patients received study treatment. Patients in both groups received a median of 8weeks of treatment. The median PFS was 3.1months for erlotinib/sorafenib versus 1.7months for sorafenib alone; response rates were 8% and 4%, respectively. Both regimens were tolerable, but toxicity was more frequent with erlotinib/sorafenib. CONCLUSIONS: These results do not suggest any benefit in continuing erlotinib after tumor progression in patients with refractory metastatic NSCLC. Both regimens tested had limited efficacy, consistent with results from other studies. ClinicalTrials.gov ID:NCT00609804.

Molecular gene expression profiling to predict the tissue of origin and direct site-specific therapy in patients with carcinoma of unknown primary site: a prospective trial of the Sarah Cannon research institute.

PURPOSE: Molecular tumor profiling is a promising diagnostic technique to determine the tissue of origin in patients with carcinoma of unknown primary site (CUP). However, the clinical value of these molecular predictions is unknown. We used tumor profiling results to direct site-specific therapy for patients with CUP. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Tumor biopsy specimens from previously untreated patients with CUP were tested with a 92-gene reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction cancer classification assay. When a tissue of origin was predicted, patients who were treatment candidates received standard site-specific first-line therapy. RESULTS: Of 289 patients enrolled, 252 had successful assays performed, and 247 (98%) had a tissue of origin predicted. Sites most commonly predicted were biliary tract (18%), urothelium (11%), colorectal (10%), and non-small-cell lung (7%). Two hundred twenty-three patients were treatment candidates, and 194 patients received assay-directed site-specific treatment. In these 194 patients, the median survival time was 12.5 months (95% CI, 9.1 to 15.4 months). When the assay predicted tumor types that were clinically more responsive, the median survival was significantly improved when compared with predictions of more resistant tumors (13.4 v 7.6 months, respectively; P = .04). CONCLUSION: In this large prospective trial, molecular tumor profiling predicted a tissue of origin in most patients with CUP. The median survival time of 12.5 months for patients who received assay-directed site-specific therapy compares favorably with previous results using empiric CUP regimens. Patients with CUP predicted to have more responsive tumor types had longer survival compared with patients with less responsive tumor types. Molecular tumor profiling contributes to the management of patients with CUP and should be a part of their standard evaluation.

Pazopanib as second-line treatment after sunitinib or bevacizumab in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma: a Sarah Cannon Oncology Research Consortium Phase II Trial.

BACKGROUND: This phase II trial examined the activity and toxicity of second-line treatment with pazopanib after failure of first-line single-agent treatment with sunitinib or bevacizumab in patients with advanced clear cell renal carcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifty-five patients with metastatic clear cell renal carcinoma who had previously received first-line treatment with sunitinib (39 patients) or bevacizumab (16 patients) were enrolled. Patients received pazopanib 800 mg orally daily and were evaluated for response after 8 weeks of treatment. Responses were measured using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), version 1.0, and confirmed with repeated scans after 8 weeks. Patients with objective response or stable disease continued treatment until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity occurred. RESULTS: Fifteen of 55 patients (27%) had objective response to pazopanib. An additional 27 patients (49%) had stable disease, for a disease control rate of 76%. After a median follow-up of 16.7 months, the median progression-free survival for the entire group was 7.5 months (95% confidence interval, 5.4-9.4 months). Similar progression-free survival was observed regardless of whether previous treatment was with sunitinib or bevacizumab. The estimated overall survival rate for the entire group at 24 months was 43%. CONCLUSION: Pazopanib is an active agent for the treatment of advanced clear cell renal carcinoma, even after failure of sunitinib or bevacizumab. Treatment with pazopanib should be considered early in the sequence of therapy for patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma.

Everolimus in combination with paclitaxel and carboplatin in patients with metastatic melanoma: a phase II trial of the Sarah Cannon Research Institute Oncology Research Consortium.

This phase II trial examined the efficacy and toxicity of first-line treatment with everolimus, paclitaxel, and carboplatin in patients with advanced melanoma. Seventy patients with metastatic or locally advanced unresectable melanoma who had been untreated previously with chemotherapy or targeted agents received first-line treatment with everolimus (5 mg, orally, daily), paclitaxel (175 mg/m, intravenous, every 3 weeks), and carboplatin (area under the curve 6.0, intravenous, every 3 weeks). Response to treatment was assessed every 6 weeks; responding and stable patients received six cycles of paclitaxel and carboplatin, and subsequently continued single-agent everolimus until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Twelve patients (17%) showed objective responses (all partial); an additional 27 patients showed measurable tumor shrinkage. After a median follow-up of 15 months, the median progression-free survival was 4.0 months (95% confidence interval 2.8-5.0 months); the median survival for the entire group was 10.1 months. Myelosuppression was the most common grade 3/4 toxicity; 70% of patients experienced at least one episode of grade 3/4 toxicity while on study. Although this regimen was active in the first-line treatment of advanced melanoma, there was no suggestion of improved efficacy when compared with previous results with paclitaxel/carboplatin alone. Further study of this combination is not recommended.

Lenalidomide in combination with gemcitabine as first-line treatment for patients with metastatic carcinoma of the pancreas: a Sarah Cannon Research Institute phase II trial.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the 6-mo overall survival, safety and tolerability of lenalidomide in combination with standard gemcitabine as first-line treatment for patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. METHODS: Eligibility included: previously untreated metastatic adenocarcinoma of the pancreas with metastases incurable by surgery/radiation therapy; ECOG PS 0-2; adequate organ function; prophylactic anticoagulation for venous thromboembolic events (VTEs). Patients received lenalidomide 25 mg PO (days 1-21) and gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m ( 2) IV (days 1, 8 and 15) each 28-day cycle, with response evaluations every eight weeks. RESULTS: Between 5/2009-4/2010, 72 patients (median age 64 years; 68% male; 42% ECOG PS 0) were enrolled in this multicenter, community-based study. Six-month OS was 37% (95% CI 26-48%). Median PFS and OS were 2.3 (95% CI 1.9-3.5) and 4.7 (95% CI 3.4-5.7) months, respectively. Eight partial responses (11%) were documented. Thirty-nine patients (54%) experienced thrombocytopenia (2 patients, 3% grade 4). Hematologic toxicities resulted in dose modifications for the majority of patients. Twenty patients (28%) developed VTEs during treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The observed 6-month OS (37%) of lenalidomide with gemcitabine does not suggest improvement compared with historical results with gemcitabine alone. Toxicities and dose modifications likely limited dose intensity. Further development of this regimen in pancreas cancer is not recommended.

Phase II study of maintenance sunitinib following irinotecan and carboplatin as first-line treatment for patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Inhibition of angiogenesis may be effective in the treatment of small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). Sunitinib, an oral agent that inhibits the VEGF signaling pathway, may delay progression in sequence with chemotherapy. This phase II trial was designed to evaluate the role of sunitinib monotherapy following 6 cycles of irinotecan and carboplatin in patients with newly diagnosed extensive-stage (ES) SCLC. METHOD: Patients aged ≥18 years with previously untreated ES-SCLC were eligible. Additional criteria included: ECOG PS 0-1, no active brain metastases, and adequate organ function. Patients received 28-day cycles of irinotecan (60 mg/m(2), days 1, 8, 15) and carboplatin (AUC=4, day 1), and were assessed for response every 8 weeks. After 6 cycles of chemotherapy, patients with stable disease or responding disease proceeded to sunitinib monotherapy (25 mg orally daily) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was 1-year overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Between 2/09 and 10/09, 34 patients (median age 65 years [range, 41-80]) were enrolled. 53% of patients were male, 47% had ECOG PS 0.21 patients (62%) completed 6 cycles of chemotherapy, and 17 (50%) initiated sunitinib monotherapy (median duration: 9 weeks; range, 2-28+weeks). After a median follow-up of 50 weeks (range: 37-68 weeks), 22 (62%) of the patients remain alive. The objective response rate with chemotherapy was 59%, and an additional 20% had stable disease. 1-year OS was 54% and median time to progression was 7.6 months. Grade 3/4 toxicity was rare during sunitinib monotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: This phase II trial provides support for further study of sunitinib maintenance therapy following platinum-doublet chemotherapy in patients with ES-SCLC. The 1 year OS of 54% is encouraging, and a randomized trial would be appropriate to assess sunitinib's impact following chemotherapy.

Bevacizumab and everolimus in the treatment of patients with metastatic melanoma: a phase 2 trial of the Sarah Cannon Oncology Research Consortium.

BACKGROUND: In this phase 2 study, the activity and tolerability of the combination of bevacizumab, an inhibitor of angiogenesis, and everolimus, an inhibitor of the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR), was evaluated in the treatment of patients with metastatic melanoma. METHODS: Patients with metastatic melanoma who had received up to 2 previous systemic regimens (chemotherapy and/or immunotherapy) were eligible. Previous treatment with angiogenesis or mTOR inhibitors was not allowed. All patients received bevacizumab at a dose of 15 mg/kg intravenously every 21 days and everolimus at a dose of 10 mg orally daily. Patients were re-evaluated every 6 weeks; those with an objective response or stable disease (according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors [RECIST]) continued therapy until tumor progression or unacceptable toxicity occurred. RESULTS: Fifty-seven patients with metastatic melanoma received a median of 4 treatment cycles (range, 1-14+ cycles). Seven patients (12%) achieved major responses, whereas 33 patients (58%) were found to have stable disease at the time of first evaluation. The median progression-free and overall survivals were 4 months and 8.6 months, respectively. Approximately 43% of patients were alive after 12 months of follow-up. The treatment regimen was well tolerated by the majority of patients. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of bevacizumab and everolimus was found to have moderate activity and was well tolerated in the treatment of patients with metastatic melanoma. Further exploration of agents with these mechanisms of action is indicated, perhaps in combination with inhibitors of the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway.