Results of two Phase 1, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Studies (Ascending Single-dose and Multiple-dose Studies) to Determine the Safety, Tolerability, and Pharmacokinetics of Orally Administered LX9211 in Healthy Participants.

PURPOSE: For neuropathic pain, current therapies do not provide relief for most patients; less than half achieve a 50% pain reduction. Current analgesics have adverse effects. We present 2 Phase I studies of LX9211, a new small-molecule AP2-associated kinase 1 inhibitor with preclinical effectiveness in pain relief. METHODS: Both randomized, placebo-controlled studies' primary objectives evaluated the tolerability and pharmacokinetic properties of oral LX9211. In the single-ascending dose (SAD) study, single, oral, liquid doses of 5, 10, 15, 20, 30, 40, 80, 120, 160, 200, and 300 mg of LX9211 or placebo were administered in the fasted state and 40 mg in a fed group. In the multiple-ascending dose (MAD) study, a loading dose was administered on day 1 and maintenance doses were administered daily on days 2 to 14. The treatment groups were designated as: 25/2.5, 50/5.0, 100/10, 150/15, and 200/20 mg. The secondary objectives included ECG evaluation. FINDINGS: The SAD study enrolled 96 participants 19 to 61 years of age (86.5% male) in 12 cohorts (2:6 placebo:LX9211), and the MAD study enrolled 50 participants 20 to 63 years of age (78% male) in 5 cohorts (2:8 placebo:LX9211). Both studies had a good LX9211 safety profile. No deaths or serious adverse events occurred. All treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were mild, except for moderate nausea and vomiting reported in 1 participant in the SAD 300-mg cohort. All TEAEs were considered recovered or resolved, except for blurred vision (n = 1 in the SAD 300-mg group), which was ongoing at the last visit. One participant in the MAD study (50/5 mg group) discontinued participation in the study early because of TEAEs (angioedema, dermatitis allergic, and urticaria). Headache, dizziness, constipation, and nausea were the most common TEAEs. In the SAD study, 4 participants in the 200-mg cohort developed headache approximately 24 hours after dosing, lasting 24 to 48 hours. Only 1 required treatment (acetaminophen). No notable ECG changes from baseline were found in either study. After both single- and multiple-dose administration, plasma exposure of LX9211 was approximately dose proportional. Steady-state LX9211 plasma concentrations were rapidly attained and maintained by a dosing regimen of a loading dose, followed by daily maintenance doses (1/10 the loading dose). No accumulation was as seen after multiple dosing. IMPLICATIONS: These studies found that LX9211 was safe and well tolerated in healthy participants. These findings suggest it is appropriate to take LX9211 forward into Phase II studies of patients with diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain and postherpetic neuralgia. LX9211 has received fast track designation by the US Food and Drug Administration.

Patient-reported Symptom Experiences in Patients With Carcinoid Syndrome After Participation in a Study of Telotristat Etiprate: A Qualitative Interview Approach.

PURPOSE: Telotristat etiprate, a tryptophan hydroxylase inhibitor, was previously evaluated in a Phase II randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial in patients with carcinoid syndrome (CS) and diarrhea not adequately controlled by octreotide. The objective of the current study was to characterize the symptom experiences of patients participating in that trial. METHODS: Consenting patients participated in one-on-one, qualitative interviews focused on eliciting symptoms they had experienced in association with their CS diagnosis and recollection of symptom changes they experienced while participating in the Phase II trial. FINDINGS: Among the 23 patients who participated in the previous 4-week dose-escalation study, 16 were eligible for interviews and 11 participated in the present study. The median time from study completion to the interview was 31 months; 4 of 11 patients were receiving telotristat etiprate in a follow-up, open-label trial at the time of interview. All of the patients (100%) described diarrhea as a symptom of CS, with effects on the emotional, social, and physical aspects of their lives. Improvement in diarrhea during the study was described by 82% of participants, and was very impactful in several patients. Results led to the design and implementation of a larger interview program in Phase III and helped to establish a definition of clinically meaningful change for the clinical development program. IMPLICATIONS: The diarrhea associated with CS can have a large impact on daily lives, and patient interviews can characterize and capture clinically meaningful improvements with treatment. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00853047.

Effects of LX4211, a dual sodium-dependent glucose cotransporters 1 and 2 inhibitor, on postprandial glucose, insulin, glucagon-like peptide 1, and peptide tyrosine tyrosine in a dose-timing study in healthy subjects.

BACKGROUND: LX4211 is a first-in-class dual inhibitor of sodium-dependent glucose cotransporters 1 and 2 (SGLT1 and SGLT2). SGLT1 is the primary transporter for glucose absorption from the gastrointestinal tract, and SGLT2 is the primary transporter for glucose reabsorption in the kidney. SGLT1 inhibition reduces postprandial glucose (PPG) levels and increases the release of gastrointestinal peptides such as glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) and peptide tyrosine tyrosine (PYY), whereas SGLT2 inhibition results in increased urinary glucose excretion (UGE). OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated how timing of dose relative to meals changes the pharmacodynamic (PD) effects of LX4211 treatment, including effects on UGE, fasting plasma glucose, PPG, insulin, total and active GLP-1, and PYY. The safety and tolerability of LX4211 in healthy subjects were also assessed. METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multiple-dose study to determine the PD effects of LX4211 dose timing relative to meals in 12 healthy subjects. Blood and urine were collected for the analysis of PD variables. RESULTS: Twelve healthy subjects 30 to 51 years of age were enrolled and treated. Treatment with LX4211 resulted in significant elevation of total and active GLP-1, and PYY while significantly decreasing PPG levels relative to placebo, likely by reducing SGLT1-mediated intestinal glucose absorption. Comparisons performed among the dosing schedules indicated that dosing immediately before breakfast maximized the PD effects of LX4211 on both SGLT1 and SGLT2 inhibition. The comparative results suggested distinct SGLT1 effects on GLP-1, PYY, glucose, and insulin, which were separate from SGLT2-mediated effects, indicating that SGLT1 inhibition with LX4211 may be clinically meaningful. All treatments were well tolerated with no evidence of diarrhea with LX4211 treatment. CONCLUSIONS: This clinical study indicates that dosing of LX4211 immediately before breakfast maximized the PD effects of both SGLT1 and SGLT 2 inhibition and provided a convenient dosing schedule for future trials. LX4211 was safe and well tolerated and, due to its SGLT1 inhibition, produced strong PPG reductions and low UGE relative to selective SGLT2 inhibitors. LX4211 may provide a promising new therapy for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. The potential long-term clinical benefits and safety of LX4211 treatment will need to be confirmed in large clinical trials. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01334242.

Sunitinib malate in previously untreated, nonsquamous, non-small cell lung cancer patients over the age of 70 years: results of a Phase II trial.

BACKGROUND: Some elderly patients may have reduced tolerance the standard therapy (chemotherapy doublets) for stage III/IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Sunitinib malate (S), an oral, multitargeted kinase inhibitor, shows promise as 2nd-line NSCLC treatment. This study explored the safety/efficacy of S in elderly patients with previously untreated NSCLC. PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: disease control rate (DCR) at six-weeks. SECONDARY OBJECTIVES: overall response (OR, CR+PR), progression-free survival (PFS), time to progression (TTP), one-yr survival, quality of life (QOL), and safety. TREATMENT: S 37.5 mg daily/42-day cycle until PD or intolerable toxicity. Key inclusion: chemo-naïve stage IIIB/IV NSCLC (nonsquamous histology); ECOG PS=0-1; ≥ 70 years; normal organ function. Exclusion: hemoptysis, anticoagulation, or clotting diathesis. Other standard S-specific criteria applied. RESULTS: 63 patients enrolled/60 treated. DEMOGRAPHICS: 51 % male, 95 % white, median age 78 years (range, 70-88), 73 % ECOG=1, 97 % Stage IV, 83 % adenocarcinoma, 44 % prior surgery, 19 % prior radiation. With a median of 2 cycles (range, 1-16), DCR=63 %, OR=7 % (0 CR, 4 PR). Median follow-up=5.8 months (all; 15.9 months survivors), median PFS =3.0 months (range, <1-25.1), median TTP=4.5 months (range, <1-25.1), and 1-year survival=26.4 % [95 % CI: 15.9, 38.2]. QOL declined initially, but improved over time. TREATMENT-related adverse events included: fatigue (48.3 %); diarrhea (38.3 %); thrombocytopenia (33.3 %), anorexia (26.7 %), mucositis (25.0 %); nausea (25.0 %), dysgeusia (20.0 %), and neutropenia (20.0 %). Conclusions The study met its primary endpoint. S produced acceptable DCR and QOL improved; however, OR was disappointing (7 %) and toxicity was greater than expected. A biomarker to identify patients more likely to benefit from S is needed.

Association of rash with outcomes in a randomized phase II trial evaluating cetuximab in combination with mitoxantrone plus prednisone after docetaxel for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: Cetuximab (C), a chimeric monoclonal antibody that binds epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), is active against androgen-independent prostate cancer cell lines and might enhance the activity of chemotherapy. The efficacy of combining cetuximab with mitoxantrone (M) plus prednisone (MP) was evaluated in progressive metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) after receiving docetaxel. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with progression after receiving docetaxel were eligible and randomized 2:1 to CMP or MP. Therapy was mitoxantrone 12 mg/m(2) intravenously (I.V.) on day 1, oral prednisone 10 mg daily in both arms, and cetuximab 250 mg/m(2) I.V. (400 mg/m(2) day 1, cycle 1) on days 1, 8, and 15 in the CMP arm. Cycles were repeated every 21 days. Radiologic assessments of disease and PSA (prostate-specific antigen) occurred every 4 cycles. The primary endpoint was time to progression (TTP). RESULTS: A total of 115 patients were enrolled, 75 in the CMP and 40 in the MP arm: the median TTP was 4.9 and 6.6 months, respectively; the measurable disease response rate was 2% and 4%, the PSA response rate 7.7% and 17.6%, and median survival 11.9 and 15.7 months, respectively. Key grade 3-4 toxicities were neutropenia 44% and 25.6%, anemia 6.7% and 7.7%, thrombocytopenia 6.7% and 2.6%, and fatigue 8% in both arms. In an unplanned exploratory analysis, median TTP with (n = 24) and without rash (n = 51) in the CMP arm was 10.3 months vs. 2.8 months (P = .004). On multivariable analysis,rash was significantly associated with TTP (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.43; P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: The treatment with CMP is not recommended in unselected men with docetaxel-treated CRPC, although rash might help develop tailored therapy.

A Phase III trial of fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab vs. pentostatin, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab in B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia.

BACKGROUND: Uncontrolled studies comparing pentostatin (P), cyclophosphamide (C), and rituximab (R) (PCR) to fludarabine plus C+R (FCR) suggest similar efficacy with fewer infectious complications with PCR. We compared FCR and PCR in previously-untreated or minimally-treated B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). TREATMENT: FCR (F 20 mg/m(2) Days 1-5, C 600 mg/m(2) Day 1, R 375 mg/m(2) Day 1) (28-day cycles) or PCR (P 4 mg/m(2) Day 1, C 600 mg/m(2) Day 1, R 375 mg/m(2) Day 1) (21-day cycles). Dose 1 of R: 100 mg/m(2) was given on Day 8 Cycle 1 and the remainder on Day 9; in subsequent cycles the entire dose was given on Day 1. RESULTS: Ninety-two patients were randomly assigned to each group (N = 184). Groups were balanced; ~20% had received prior chemotherapy. The infection rate (FCR/PCR) was 31%/36%, the infective event rate was 38%/45%; 30 (35%)/37 (44%) patients were hospitalized; total hospitalization days was 271/404. 12 (14%)/6 (7%) patients achieved complete remissions (CR); the overall response rate (ORR) including CR+nodular PR (nPR)+PR was 59%/49%. Grade 3-4 treatment related AEs: neutropenia (69%/57%), leukopenia (34%/17%), thrombocytopenia (13%/6%). Grade 3-4 infections: febrile neutropenia (8%/6%), fever (2%/6%), infection (1%/3%), urinary tract infection (1%/0%), pneumonia (3%/1%), and sepsis (1%/2%); 5 deaths (1 FCR/4 PCR) were treatment-related. CONCLUSIONS: PCR and FCR have significant activity in CLL and can be given safely in the community setting despite significant toxicity. ORRs were lower than expected; the CR rate was higher (NS) with FCR. This trial did not demonstrate a lower infection rate with PCR.

A phase II open-label trial of bortezomib in patients with multiple myeloma who have undergone an autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplant and failed to achieve a complete response.

BACKGROUND: A majority of multiple myeloma (MM) patients fail to achieve complete response (CR) to peripheral blood stem cell transplantation (PBSCT); effective options following autologous transplantation are needed. Bortezomib (B) is active against MM. This study was conducted to determine the feasibility, safety, tolerability, and efficacy of B following high-dose melphalan therapy and PBSCT. Methods Fifty patients enrolled (48 evaluable) and 49 were treated (safety population). TREATMENT: 4 cycles B 1.3 mg/m(2) Days 1, 4, 8, and 11/21-days; 4 additional cycles were permitted for stable or responding patients. Results Median age was 55 years (range, 38-73), 68% male, 64% ECOG PS = 0, 44% Durie-Salmon Stage IIIA prior to induction, 42% had symptomatic IgG MM; 74% had prior single transplant (26% tandem). Responses post-transplant: 70% PRs, 18% MRs. A median of 4 cycles (range, 2-8) of B were administered. Responses: CR 8%, uCR 2%, PR 23%, uPR 19%, MR 10%, and no change 35%; median time-to-treatment failure (TTF) was 6.2 months (range, 1.0-19.4). Three deaths occurred (n = 1 sepsis, n = 2 disease progression). Grade 3-4 treatment-related toxicities included: thrombocytopenia, neuropathy (14%, each); asthenia, neutropenia (10%, each); and nausea (4%). Twelve patients (24%) discontinued treatment due to toxicity and 30 patients (60%) completed the study; 20 patients started new treatment (median 5.8 months [range, 1.5-20.3]). CONCLUSIONS: The study closed early due to widespread availability of B, and the lack of B-naïve patients. Bortezomib monotherapy after melphalan and autologous PBSCT was feasible, safe and well-tolerated (toxicities were manageable), but failed to produce the hypothesized response rates.

Phase III trial of cetuximab, bevacizumab, and 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin vs. FOLFOX-bevacizumab in colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Cetuximab (C), alone or with irinotecan, demonstrates activity in irinotecan-refractory colorectal cancer (CRC). Activity of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), leucovorin (L), and bevacizumab (B), and preliminary data of cetuximab + bevacizumab, and toxicity profiles suggests that FOLF-CB (5-FU, L, C+B) may have activity with a favorable toxicity profile as first-line therapy. METHODS: Eligible patients were randomized at registration to either arm A (mFOLFOX6-B) (modified, 5-FU. L (folinic acid), oxaliplatin (O) + bevacizumab), administered days 1 and 15 of each 28-day cycle as bevacizumab 5 mg/kg, oxaliplatin 85 mg/m(2), leucovorin 400 mg/m(2), and 5-FU 400 mg/m(2) then 1200 mg/m(2)/day for 48 hours, or arm B (FOLF-CB), which included bevacizumab, leucovorin, and 5-FU as in arm A and cetuximab 400 mg/m(2) day 1 cycle 1; all other weekly cetuximab doses were 250 mg/m(2). RESULTS: Two hundred forty-seven patients (arm A/arm B 124/123) were enrolled, and 239 were treated (118/121). Twelve-month progression-free survival (PFS) was 45%/32%, objective response rates (ORR) (complete response [CR] + partial response [PR]) were 52%/41%, disease control rates (CR+PR+stable disease [SD]) were 87%/83%, and median overall survival (OS) was 21/19.5 months, respectively. Grade 3-4 neutropenia was higher in arm A (28%/7%), as was grade 3 fatigue (12%/3%), and grade 3 neuropathy (11%/< 1%), whereas acneiform rash was confined to arm B. Retrospective analysis of KRAS mutational status did not demonstrate KRAS as a meaningful determinant of activity, except in arm B patients with KRAS-mutated tumors, which resulted in inferior PFS. Patient satisfaction favored the control (mFOLFOX6-B). CONCLUSION: FOLF-CB was not superior to mFOLFOX6-B in terms of 12-month PFS and ORR, and was not more acceptable to patients. This trial supports the conclusion of other recently reported trials that concurrent cetuximab+bevacizumab should not be routinely used in metastatic CRC.

A randomized phase III trial of combined paclitaxel, carboplatin, and radiation therapy followed by weekly paclitaxel or observation for patients with locally advanced inoperable non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: This study was designed to determine the efficacy and safety of additional maintenance chemotherapy after standard induction chemotherapy/radiation therapy (XRT) in stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The primary objective was to increase 1-year survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients (N = 220) had confirmed stage IIIA or IIIB NSCLC, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-1. Patients received induction chemotherapy (paclitaxel 200 mg/m(2) + carboplatin AUC = 6/3 weeks) for 2 cycles, followed by paclitaxel 45 mg/m(2) + carboplatin AUC = 2 weekly ×7 and concurrent daily XRT (cumulative dose = 66.6 Gy in 37 fractions) and then observation or maintenance. Before randomization, 101 patients (46%) discontinued treatment due to progressive disease (n = 34), toxicity (n = 33), patient request (n = 13), death (n = 7), or other (n = 14). The remaining 119 patients were randomly assigned to either "observation" or "maintenance" (6 cycles of paclitaxel 70 mg/m(2)/wk [3 weeks on/1 week off]); a median of 5 of 6 planned cycles was delivered in the maintenance arm. RESULTS: For the observation group vs. the maintenance group, the estimated 1- and 4-year survival rates were 77% vs. 66% and 38% vs. 17% (median, 26.9 months vs. 16.1 months, respectively [P = .07]); the estimated 1- and 4-year performance-free survival (PFS) were 46% vs. 24% and 25% vs. 13% (median, 10.2 months vs. 8.2 months, respectively [P = .04]). Common toxicities were neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and fatigue. CONCLUSION: Median survival in both groups surpassed the standard, most notably the 26.9-month survival in the observation group. Maintenance chemotherapy, when added to a regimen of both induction and concurrent chemoradiotherapy, did not improve clinical outcomes, with endpoints favoring the standard arm.

Azacitidine favorably modulates PSA kinetics correlating with plasma DNA LINE-1 hypomethylation in men with chemonaïve castration-resistant prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Azacitidine is a hypomethylating agent that activates genes repressed by promoter methylation. Preclinically, demethylating agents reverse resistance of prostate cancer to androgen ablation. A phase II trial evaluated azacitidine for men with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) progressing on combined androgen blockade (CAB). METHODS: Chemonaïve patients with CRPC on CAB and PSA-doubling time (DT) < 3 months were eligible. The primary endpoint was prolongation of PSA-DT to ≥ 3 months. Correlation of biologic activity (fetal hemoglobin, plasma DNA LINE-1 methylation) with prolongation of PSA-DT was tested. CAB was continued and azacitidine 75 mg/m(2) was administered subcutaneously on days 1-5 of each 28-day cycle up to 12 cycles or until clinical progression/intolerable toxicities. RESULTS: Thirty-six patients were enrolled, 80.6% had metastatic disease, and 34 were evaluable. A PSA-DT ≥ 3 months was attained in 19 patients (55.8%). Overall median PSA-DT was significantly prolonged compared to baseline (2.8 vs. 1.5 months, P < 0.01). Fourteen patients had some PSA decline during therapy and 1 patient had a ≥ 30% decline compared with baseline. The median clinical progression-free survival was 12.4 weeks. Grade 3 toxicities included fatigue (12%), and neutropenia (6%), with 4 patients discontinuing due to toxicities. A trend in decreasing plasma DNA LINE-1 methylation was seen with longer treatment duration (P = 0.06), which significantly correlated with prolongation of PSA-DT (P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Azacitidine favorably modulates PSA kinetics in chemonaïve CRPC that correlates with decreasing plasma DNA LINE-1 methylation. Given the excellent tolerability, further development of azacitidine for CRPC may be warranted, with exploration of combination regimens.

Gemcitabine plus enzastaurin or single-agent gemcitabine in locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer: results of a phase II, randomized, noncomparative study.

PURPOSE: Gemcitabine (G) is standard therapy for pancreatic cancer. Enzastaurin (E) inhibits PKCß and PI3K/AKT signaling pathways with a dose-dependent effect on growth of pancreatic carcinoma xenografts. Data suggest that the GE combination may improve clinical outcomes. METHODS: Primary objective was overall survival (OS); secondary objectives assessed progression-free survival (PFS), response rate (RR), quality of life (QOL), toxicity, and relationships between biomarker expression and clinical outcomes. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to GE or G treatment; GE arm: E 500 mg p.o. daily; loading-dose (1200 mg; Day 1 Cycle 1 only) and G 1000 mg/m(2) i.v. Days 1, 8, and 15 in 28-day cycles; G arm: G as in GE. Biomarker expression was assessed by immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: Randomization totaled 130 patients (GE = 86, G = 44); 121 patients were treated (GE = 82, G = 39). GE/G median OS was 5.6/5.1 months; median PFS was 3.4/3.0 months. GE responses: 1 complete response (CR, 1.2%), 6 partial response (PR, 7.4%), and 33 stable disease (SD, 40.7%); disease control rate (DCR=CR+PR+SD, 49.4%). G responses: 2 PR (5.3%) and 16 SD (42.1%); DCR (47.4%). No QOL differences were noted between arms. GE/G Grade 3-4 toxicities included: neutropenia (18.3%/28.2%); thrombocytopenia (14.6%/25.6%); and fatigue (11.0%/7.7%). No statistically significant relationships between biomarker expression and outcomes were observed. However, patients with low expression of cytoplasmic pGSK-3ß trended toward greater OS with GE treatment. CONCLUSIONS: OS, PFS, QOL, and RR were comparable between arms. Adding E to G did not increase hematologic toxicities. GE does not warrant further investigation in unselected pancreatic cancer patients.

Pegfilgrastim appears equivalent to daily dosing of filgrastim to treat neutropenia after autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

BACKGROUND: Filgrastim decreases the time to neutrophil recovery after autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation (PBSCT). We hypothesized that single-dose pegfilgrastim would mimic multiple daily doses of filgrastim, resulting in an equivalent shortening of post-PBSCT neutropenia. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients who were eligible for PBSCT and aged >or= 18 years were identified before high-dose chemotherapy, after the harvesting and cryopreservation of peripheral blood progenitor cells (ie, > 2.5 x 10(6) CD34-positive cells/kg). Eligible patients received either standard carmustine/etoposide/cytarabine/melphalan (BEAM) or carmustine/etoposide/cytarabine/cyclophosphamide (BEAC) high-dose chemotherapy. Before high-dose chemotherapy, patients were randomly assigned to receive pegfilgrastim 6 mg on day 1 (arm A) or weight-based, dose-adjusted filgrastim beginning on day 1 (arm B) after transplantation until neutrophil engraftment. RESULTS: One-hundred and one patients were enrolled between April 2003 and April 2007. Three patients were not treated. Demographics were well-balanced in terms of stage at diagnosis, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, histology, and lines of previous therapy. Results (arm A/arm B) pertained to mean doses received (1.0/12.6), mean absolute neutrophil count recovery days (9.3/9.8), red blood cell transfusions (1.7/1.9), red blood cell transfusion units (3.1/3.8), platelet transfusions (3.1/2.8), positive blood culture rate (18%/29.2%), febrile neutropenia (FN; 18%/16.7%), and duration of FN (days; 7.1/6.9). Transplantation-related mortality and grade 3 or 4 adverse events were comparable between arms. CONCLUSION: Pegfilgrastim after PBSCT appears equivalent to multiple daily doses of filgrastim. This approach might be considered in lieu of filgrastim, thus obviating the need for multiple daily injections.

Phase III multicenter trial of doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide followed by paclitaxel compared with doxorubicin plus paclitaxel followed by weekly paclitaxel as adjuvant therapy for women with high-risk breast cancer.

PURPOSE: This study compared disease-free survival (DFS) obtained with two different regimens of adjuvant therapy in high-risk breast cancer. METHODS: Women (who had performance status [PS] of 0 to 1) with operable, histologically confirmed, stage I to III adenocarcinoma of the breast were eligible. Patients had undergone primary surgery with no residual tumor. Treatments were as follows: arm 1 was doxorubicin 60 mg/m(2) plus cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks for four cycles followed by paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks for four cycles (ie, AC-P); and arm 2 was doxorubicin 50 mg/m(2) plus paclitaxel 200 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks for four cycles followed by paclitaxel 80 mg/m(2) weekly for 12 weeks. RESULTS: Overall, 1,830 patients were enrolled and 1,801 were treated: arm 1 (n = 906; AC-->P) and arm 2 (n = 895; AP-WP). Overall, patients had a PS of 0 (88%), had estrogen receptor and progesterone receptor-positive disease (52%), had one to three positive nodes (46%), and were postmenopausal (57%); the median age was 52 years. Currently, 1,640 patients (90%) are alive. The 6-year DFS was 79% to 80% in both groups. Disease relapse was the cause of death for 83 patients in arm 1 and in 66 patients of arm 2. Overall 6-year survival rates were 82% and 87% in arms 1 and 2, respectively. Reasons for patients being taken off study treatment included toxicity (13% in arm 1 v 20% in arm 2), progressive disease or recurrence (7% v 5%), and consent withdrawn (9% v 8%), respectively. The most frequent toxicities were hematologic, including neutropenia and leukopenia followed by neuropathy, myalgia, nausea, fatigue, headache, arthralgia, and vomiting. CONCLUSION: The results indicate that the AP-WP regimen is an equally effective and tolerable option for the adjuvant treatment of patients with high-risk breast cancer. The substitution of paclitaxel for cyclophosphamide results in comparable effectiveness of the regimen.

Dosing considerations for capecitabine-irinotecan regimens in the treatment of metastatic and/or locally advanced colorectal cancer.

Capecitabine (Xeloda), Roche Laboratories Inc., Nutley, NJ) is an orally administered fluoropyrimidine carbamate that serves as a prodrug of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), an integral component of chemotherapy (CT) regimens for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). As the drug is orally administered, capecitabine permits greater convenience and flexibility in dosing by eliminating the need for continuous infusion and its potential complications. In phase 3 trials, capecitabine has been used as an alternative to 5-FU, both as a monotherapy and in combination with agents such as oxaliplatin (as XELOX), with good efficacy and tolerability. Combination therapy with capecitabine and irinotecan (XELIRI), however, has produced more variable results, with some dose combinations and schedules resulting in excessive and/or unexplained treatment-related toxicity. Recent initiatives using lower doses of capecitabine and irinotecan, as well as alternative dosing schedules, have resulted in more favorable outcomes (efficacy and tolerability), even in combination with targeted-agents such as bevacizumab. Dose reduction in elderly populations and in those with moderate renal impairment also appears to be important for minimizing toxicity with XELIRI regimens. Although additional phase 3 studies are needed, XELIRI may be an effective base CT regimen, allowing a greater number of treatment options for tumor control in patients with mCRC.

Results of a phase 2 study of bortezomib in patients with relapsed or refractory indolent lymphoma.

This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of single-agent bortezomib in indolent B-cell lymphoma that had relapsed from or was refractory to rituximab. Sixty patients enrolled: 59 were treated with bortezomib 1.3 mg/m(2) on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 for up to eight 21-day cycles; responders could receive 4 additional cycles; maintenance was optional. Fifty-three evaluable patients completed more than 2 cycles. The median age was 70 years, 53% female, Ann Arbor stage III-IIIE (28%) and IV (65%); 43 patients (72%) had more than 2 prior regimens; and 6 patients went on to maintenance. Overall responses are as follows: 1 complete response (1.9%), 3 unconfirmed complete response (5.7%), 3 partial response (5.7%), 34 stable disease (64.2%), and 12 progressive disease (22.6%). Median time to response = 2.2 months (range, 1.2-5.3 months); duration of response = 7.9 months (2.8-21.3 months); 1-year survival was 73% and 2-year survival was 58%; median survival = 27.7 months (range, 1.4-30.9 months); median progression-free survival = 5.1 months (range, 0.2-27.7 months), median time to progression = 5.1 months (range, 0.2-27.7 months), and median event-free survival = 1.8 months (range, 0.2-27.7 months). Treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events included: thrombocytopenia (20%), fatigue (10%), neutropenia (8.5%), and neuropathy and diarrhea (6.8% each). This study demonstrates that bortezomib has modest activity against marginal zone and follicular lymphoma; it has the potential for combination with other agents in low-grade lymphomas. Maintenance therapy should be explored further.

Phase II trial of nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel, carboplatin, and bevacizumab in first-line patients with advanced nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Carboplatin/paclitaxel chemotherapy with bevacizumab is an accepted standard treatment for advanced nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The development of nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel (nab-paclitaxel) has circumvented many of the infusion difficulties associated with standard solvent-based paclitaxel (in Cremophor) and offers theoretical advantages in efficacy. This trial evaluated the combination of nab-paclitaxel, carboplatin, and bevacizumab in advanced (stage IIIB/IV) nonsquamous NSCLC. METHODS: Fifty patients with stage IIIB/IV NSCLC were enrolled between October 2005 and April 2006; 48 were treated with nab-paclitaxel 300 mg/m2, carboplatin area under the curve = 6, and bevacizumab 15 mg/kg every 21 days until progression or intolerable toxicity, up to 4 cycles; an additional 2 cycles could be administered to responding patients and the physician's discretion; maintenance bevacizumab was not administered. Patient demographics included: 56% female, median age 67 years (range, 32-83), performance status 0 (52%) or 1 (48%), adenocarcinoma 86%, and stage IV disease 82%. Responding patients received a minimum of 4 cycles. The primary end point was response rate. RESULTS: Response rate was 31% with a stable disease rate of 54%. No complete responses were observed. Median progression-free survival was 9.8 months (range, <1-22.3), and median survival was 16.8 months. Most frequent grades 3 and 4 treatment-related toxicities were neutropenia (54%) and fatigue (17%). CONCLUSIONS: The combination of nab-paclitaxel, carboplatin, and bevacizumab was well tolerated with moderate neutropenia. Adverse events were manageable. Survival results are encouraging. These results indicate that this combination has promising activity as first-line therapy in patients with nonsquamous NSCLC.

Randomized phase III trial of gemcitabine-based chemotherapy with in situ RRM1 and ERCC1 protein levels for response prediction in non-small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: We evaluated the efficacy of gemcitabine versus gemcitabine and carboplatin in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and a performance status (PS) of 2 and assessed if tumoral RRM1 and ERCC1 protein levels are predictive of response to therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A randomized phase III trial was conducted in community-based oncology practices. Tumor specimens were collected a priori and shipped to a single laboratory for blinded determination of in situ RRM1 and ERCC1 protein expression levels by an automated quantitative immunofluorescent-based technology. RESULTS: One hundred seventy patients were randomly assigned. Overall median survival was 5.1 months for gemcitabine and 6.7 months for gemcitabine and carboplatin (P = .24). RRM1 (range, 5.3 to 105.6; median, 34.1) and ERCC1 (range, 5.2 to 131.3; median, 34.7) values were significantly and inversely correlated with disease response (r = -0.41; P = .001 for RRM1; r = -0.39; P = .003 for ERCC1; ie, response was better for patients with low levels of expression). A model for response prediction that included RRM1, ERCC1, and treatment arm, was highly predictive of the treatment response observed (P = .0005). We did not find statistically significant associations between survival and RRM1 or ERCC1 levels. CONCLUSION: Single-agent chemotherapy remains the standard of care for patients with advanced NSCLC and poor PS. Quantitative analysis of RRM1 and ERCC1 protein expression in routinely collected tumor specimens in community oncology practices is predictive of response to gemcitabine and gemcitabine and carboplatin therapy. Oncologists should consider including in situ expression analysis for these proteins into their therapeutic decisions.

Phase II evaluation of nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel in platinum-sensitive patients with recurrent ovarian, peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancer.

PURPOSE: Patients with recurrent ovarian, peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancer have limited therapeutic options. There are no reports of nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel (nab-paclitaxel) in patients with recurrent platinum-sensitive disease. We report efficacy and toxicity with nab-paclitaxel in this group. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty-seven patients enrolled (44 assessable patients). Main inclusion criteria were histologically or cytologically confirmed epithelial cancer of the ovary, fallopian tube, or peritoneum (any stage, grade 2 to 3 if stage I) and measurable disease according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) or elevated CA-125 (> 70 U/mL) in patients without measurable disease. Patients received nab-paclitaxel 260 mg/m(2) administered intravenously for 30 minutes on day 1 of a 21-day cycle for six cycles or until disease progression. RESULTS: Median age was 65.5 years; 76% of patients had stage IIIC or IV disease, 81% had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0, and 94% had prior surgery. For assessable patients, the objective response rate (ORR) was 64% (15 complete responses [CR] and 13 partial responses [PR] among 44 assessable patients). In patients evaluated with RECIST only, the ORR was 45% (one CR and four PR of 11 patients). In patients with only elevated CA-125, ORR was 82% (seven CRs and two PRs of 11 patients). In patients meeting both RECIST and CA-125 criteria, the ORR was 64% (seven CRs and seven PRs of 22 patients). Median time to response was 1.3 months (range, 0.5 to 4.8 months). Estimated median progression-free survival was 8.5 months. The most frequent grade 3 to 4 treatment-related toxicities were neutropenia (24%) and neuropathy (9%). CONCLUSION: Nab-paclitaxel is active in this group of patients with recurrent ovarian, peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancer. The ORR was 64%. Toxicities were manageable. Further studies of nab-paclitaxel in combination with platinum are warranted.

Docetaxel With Cyclophosphamide Is Associated With an Overall Survival Benefit Compared With Doxorubicin and Cyclophosphamide: 7-Year Follow-Up of US Oncology Research Trial 9735.

PURPOSE: We previously reported that four cycles of docetaxel/cyclophosphamide (TC) produced superior disease-free survival (DFS) compared with four cycles of doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide (AC) in early breast cancer. Older women are under-represented in adjuvant chemotherapy trials. In our trial 16% of patients were > or = 65 years. We now report 7-year results for DFS and overall survival (OS) as well as the impact of age, hormone receptor status, and HER2 status on outcome and toxicity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive either four cycles of standard-dose AC (60/600 mg/m(2); n = 510), or TC (75/600 mg/m(2); n = 506), administered by intravenous infusion every 3 weeks. RESULTS: The median age in women younger than 65, was 50 years (range, 27 to 64) and for women > or = 65 was 69 years (range, 65 to 77). Baseline characteristics in the two age subgroups were generally well matched, except that older women tended to have more lymph node involvement. At a median of 7 years follow-up, the difference in DFS between TC and AC was significant (81% TC v 75% AC; P = .033; hazard ratio [HR], 0.74; 95% CI 0.56 to 0.98) as was OS (87% TC v 82% AC; P = .032; HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.97). TC was superior in older patients as well as younger patients. There was no interaction of hormone-receptor status or HER-2 status and treatment. Older women experienced more febrile neutropenia with TC and more anemia with AC. CONCLUSION: With longer follow-up, four cycles of TC was superior to standard AC (DFS and OS) and was a tolerable regimen in both older and younger patients.

Results of a phase II trial of cetuximab plus capecitabine/irinotecan as first-line therapy for patients with advanced and/or metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: XELIRI (capecitabine/irinotecan) is effective and well tolerated in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Cetuximab is active in mCRC alone or with chemotherapy. This study evaluated cetuximab plus XELIRI in first-line treatment of mCRC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Subjects had histologically confirmed unresectable colorectal adenocarcinoma (with T4 lesions) after preoperative chemoradiation and/or metastases. Treatment was capecitabine 1700 mg/m2 (850 mg/m2 orally twice a day on days 1-14 for 3 weeks), irinotecan 200 mg/m2 intravenously (I.V.) on day 1 every 3 weeks, and weekly cetuximab (initially 400 mg/m2 I.V. [120 minutes], subsequently 250 mg/m2 [30 minutes]). RESULTS: Baseline characteristics (N = 70): 43 men (61%); median age, 61.5 years; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0/1 = 66%/34%; 94% adenocarcinoma. Previous therapy: surgery (91%), chemotherapy (14%), or radiation therapy (7%). Responses (patients completing > or = 2 cycles): complete response (5.7%), partial response (37.7%), stable disease (43.4%), and progressive disease (PD; 13.2%); 16 patients discontinued early (n = 4 allergic reaction, n = 2 withdrew consent, n = 2 death, and n = 8 other adverse events [AEs]). The overall per-protocol response rate was 43.4% (34% intent to treat [ITT]; disease control rate, 86.8%; 69% ITT). The median time to progression was 8.1 months (range, < 1-27.0 months), and the median time to response was 1.6 months (range, 1.1-8.4 months). The median survival was 20.5 months, and 45.7% of patients remain alive. Of the 38 deaths, 84% were because of PD. No death was treatment related. The most frequent grade 3/4 treatment-related AEs included diarrhea, neutropenia, and nausea/vomiting; 32% of patients required dose reductions. All patients are off the study primarily because of PD (34.3%) or AEs (40.0%). CONCLUSION: In summary, XELIRI plus cetuximab is a promising regimen that merits further study for first-line mCRC.