Clinical benefit of continuing ALK inhibition with crizotinib beyond initial disease progression in patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC.

BACKGROUND: Crizotinib is approved to treat advanced ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but most patients ultimately develop progressive disease (PD). We investigated whether continuing ALK inhibition with crizotinib beyond PD (CBPD) is clinically beneficial and attempted to identify clinicopathologic characteristics associated with patients who experience clinical benefit. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC enrolled in two ongoing multicenter, single-arm trials who developed RECIST-defined PD were allowed to continue crizotinib if they were deriving ongoing clinical benefit. In the present retrospective analysis, continuation of CBPD was defined as >3 weeks of crizotinib treatment after PD documentation. Patients who had PD as best response to initial crizotinib treatment were excluded. Baseline and post-progression characteristics, sites of PD, and overall survival (OS) were compared in patients who continued CBPD versus those who did not. The impact of continuing CBPD on OS after adjusting for potential confounding factors was assessed. RESULTS: Among 194 crizotinib-treated patients with RECIST-defined PD, 120 (62%) continued CBPD. A significantly higher proportion of patients who continued CBPD than patients who did not had an ECOG performance status (PS) of 0/1 at PD (96% versus 82%; P=0.02). CBPD patients had significantly longer OS from the time of PD [median 16.4 versus 3.9 months; hazards ratio (HR) 0.27, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.17-0.42; P<0.0001] and from the time of initial crizotinib treatment (median 29.6 versus 10.8 months; HR 0.30, 95% CI: 0.19-0.46; P<0.0001). The multiple-covariate Cox regression analysis revealed that CBPD remained significantly associated with improved OS after adjusting for relevant factors. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who continued CBPD were more likely to have good ECOG PS (0/1) at the time of PD. Continuing ALK inhibition with crizotinib after PD may provide survival benefit to patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC.

A randomized, double-blind, phase II study of erlotinib with or without sunitinib for the second-line treatment of metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

BACKGROUND: Combined inhibition of vascular, platelet-derived, and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) pathways may overcome refractoriness to single agents in platinum-pretreated non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, multicenter, phase II trial evaluated sunitinib 37.5 mg/day plus erlotinib 150 mg/day versus placebo plus erlotinib continuously in 4-week cycles. Eligible patients had histologically confirmed stage IIIB or IV NSCLC previously treated with one or two chemotherapy regimens, including one platinum-based regimen. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) by an independent central review. RESULTS: One hundred and thirty-two patients were randomly assigned, and the median duration of follow-up was 17.7 months. The median PFS was 2.8 versus 2.0 months for the combination versus erlotinib alone (HR 0.898, P = 0.321). The median overall survival (OS) was 8.2 versus 7.6 months (HR 1.066, P = 0.617). Objective response rates (ORRs) were 4.6% and 3.0%, respectively. Sunitinib plus erlotinib was fairly well tolerated although most treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were more frequent than with erlotinib alone: diarrhea (55% versus 33%), rash (41% versus 30%), fatigue (31% versus 25%), decreased appetite (30% versus 13%), nausea (28% versus 14%), and thrombocytopenia (13% versus 0%). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of sunitinib to erlotinib did not significantly improve PFS in patients with advanced, platinum-pretreated NSCLC.

Phase II study of continuous daily sunitinib dosing in patients with previously treated advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Sunitinib malate (SUTENT) has promising single-agent activity given on Schedule 4/2 (4 weeks on treatment followed by 2 weeks off treatment) in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: We examined the activity of sunitinib on a continuous daily dosing (CDD) schedule in an open-label, multicentre phase II study in patients with previously treated, advanced NSCLC. Patients > or =18 years with stage IIIB/IV NSCLC after failure with platinum-based chemotherapy, received sunitinib 37.5 mg per day. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR). Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), 1-year survival rate, and safety. RESULTS: Of 47 patients receiving sunitinib, one patient achieved a confirmed partial response (ORR 2.1% (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.1, 11.3)) and 11 (23.4%) had stable disease (SD) > or =8 weeks. Five patients had SD>6 months. Median PFS was 11.9 weeks (95% CI 8.6, 14.1) and median OS was 37.1 weeks (95% CI 31.1, 69.7). The 1-year survival probability was 38.4% (95% CI 24.2, 52.5). Treatment was generally well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: The safety profile and time-to-event analyses, albeit relatively low response rate of 2%, suggest single-agent sunitinib on a CDD schedule may be a potential therapeutic agent for patients with advanced, refractory NSCLC.

A 5-year, randomized, open-label safety study of latanoprost and usual care in patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension.

PURPOSE: To investigate the incidence of latanoprost-related adverse events of the cornea, iris, and retina and the occurrence of hyperpigmentation. METHODS: An open-label safety surveillance study was conducted in 14 countries. Patients on intraocular pressure (IOP)-reducing therapy other than latanoprost were eligible if they required a change in therapy. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to latanoprost administered once daily or to usual care (any other commercially available medication). Patients were examined at baseline and every 6 months for 5 years. RESULTS: In all, 5854 patients were included (latanoprost, 3936; usual care, 1918). Of those initially randomized to latanoprost, 2707 (68.8%) completed the study, and 4638 (79.2%) patients received at least one dose of latanoprost. Five-year risks were < or = 3.17% for new occurrences of corneal erosions, iritis/uveitis, or macular edema in both randomization groups. Serious adverse drug reactions were reported in 17/3936 (0.43%) latanoprost and 9/1918 (0.47%) usual care patients. In all, 87.6% of patients ever treated with latanoprost had no increased iris pigmentation; no serious adverse drug reactions were reported in patients with increased iris pigmentation. CONCLUSIONS: This 5-year study suggests that latanoprost as prescribed in 14 countries is a safe long-term treatment for patients with glaucoma and ocular hypertension.

Acute hemodynamic effects of conivaptan, a dual V(1A) and V(2) vasopressin receptor antagonist, in patients with advanced heart failure.

BACKGROUND: Arginine vasopressin may contribute to abnormalities in hemodynamics and fluid balance in heart failure through its actions on V(1A) (vascular and myocardial effects) and V(2) receptors (renal effects). Inhibiting the action of vasopressin may be beneficial in patients with heart failure. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 142 patients with symptomatic heart failure (New York Heart Association class III and IV) were randomized to double-blind, short-term treatment with conivaptan, a dual V(1a)/V(2) vasopressin receptor antagonist, at a single intravenous dose (10, 20, or 40 mg) or placebo. Compared with placebo, conivaptan at 20 and 40 mg significantly reduced pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (-2.6+/-0.7, -5.4+/-0.7, and -4.6+/-0.7 mm Hg for placebo and 20 and 40 mg groups, respectively; P<0.05) and right atrial pressure (-2.0+/-0.4, -3.7+/-0.4, and -3.5+/-0.4 mm Hg for placebo and 20 and 40 mg groups, respectively; P<0.05) during the 3- to 6-hour interval after intravenous administration. Conivaptan significantly increased urine output in a dose-dependent manner (-11+/-17, 68+/-17, 152+/-19, and 176+/-18 mL/hour for placebo and 10, 20, and 40 mg groups, respectively; P<0.001) during the first 4 hours after the dose. Changes in cardiac index, systemic and pulmonary vascular resistance, blood pressure, and heart rate did not significantly differ from placebo. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with advanced heart failure, vasopressin receptor antagonism with conivaptan resulted in favorable changes in hemodynamics and urine output without affecting blood pressure or heart rate. These data suggest that vasopressin is functionally significant in advanced heart failure and that further investigations are warranted to examine the effects of conivaptan on symptom relief and natural history in such patients.