HPV-associated head and neck cancer is characterized by distinct profiles of CD8+ T cells and myeloid-derived suppressor cells.

Patients with HPV--localized head and neck cancer (HNC) show inferior outcomes after surgery and radiochemotherapy compared to HPV-associated cancers. The underlying mechanisms remain elusive, but differences in immune status and immune activity may be implicated. In this study, we analyzed immune profiles of CD8+ T cells and myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSC) in HPV+ versus HPV- disease.The overall frequency of CD8+ T cells was reduced in HNC versus healthy donors but substantially increased after curative therapy (surgery and/or radiochemotherapy). In HPV+ patients, this increase was associated with significant induction of peripheral blood CD8+/CD45RA-/CD62L- effector memory cells. The frequency of HPV-antigen-specific CD8+ cells was low even in patients with virally associated tumors and dropped to background levels after curative therapy. Pre-therapeutic counts of circulating monocytic MDSC, but not PMN-MDSC, were increased in patients with HPV- disease. This increase was accompanied by reduced fractions of terminally differentiated CD8+ effector cells. HPV- tumors showed reduced infiltrates of CD8+ and CD45RO+ immune cells compared with HPV+ tumors. Importantly, frequencies of tumor tissue-infiltrating PMN-MDSC were increased, while percentages of Granzyme B+ and Ki-67+ CD8 T cells were reduced in patients with HPV- disease.We report differences in frequencies and relative ratios of MDSC and effector T cells in HPV- HNC compared with more immunogenic HPV-associated disease. Our data provide new insight into the immunological profiles of these two tumor entities and may be utilized for more tailored immunotherapeutic approaches in the future.

Identification of a Prognostic Clinical Score for Patients With Recurrent or Metastatic Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck Treated With Systemic Therapy Including Cetuximab.

Cetuximab-based chemoimmunotherapy has been the standard of care for recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (r/m SCCHN) for more than a decade. To date, no predictive or prognostic biomarkers have been established to further guide the systemic treatment with cetuximab-based chemoimmunotherapy in r/m SCCHN. Against this background, we retrospectively analyzed clinical and blood-based parameters from 218 r/m SCCHN patients treated with chemoimmunotherapy including cetuximab. Multivariate Cox-regression models were used to assess their prognostic or predictive value. Eastern Co-operative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (≥2), older age (≥61.8 years), anemia (hemoglobin <11.80), and increased neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR ≥5.73) were independently and strongly associated with inferior overall survival (OS). To group patients according to risk profiles we established a prognostic clinical score (PCS) that can easily be used in clinical practice. The PCS stratified the cohort into low, intermediate, poor or very poor risk subgroups with median OS times of 23.4, 12.1, 7.5, and 4.0 months, respectively. Patients with low risk PCS had a prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) and increased overall response rate (ORR) under first-line cetuximab-based therapy. Interestingly, only patients with low and intermediate risk benefitted from the more intensive first-line cisplatin/cetuximab combination compared to carboplatin/cetuximab therapy, whereas the intensity of first-line treatment had no impact in the poor and very poor risk subgroups. Following external validation, particularly in the context of newly established first-line options, the PCS may guide clinical decision making and serve for stratification of patients with r/m SCCHN in future clinical trials.

Nivolumab versus everolimus in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma: Updated results with long-term follow-up of the randomized, open-label, phase 3 CheckMate 025 trial.

BACKGROUND: CheckMate 025 has shown superior efficacy for nivolumab over everolimus in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) along with improved safety and tolerability. This analysis assesses the long-term clinical benefits of nivolumab versus everolimus. METHODS: The randomized, open-label, phase 3 CheckMate 025 trial (NCT01668784) included patients with clear cell aRCC previously treated with 1 or 2 antiangiogenic regimens. Patients were randomized to nivolumab (3 mg/kg every 2 weeks) or everolimus (10 mg once a day) until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). The secondary endpoints were the confirmed objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), safety, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL). RESULTS: Eight hundred twenty-one patients were randomized to nivolumab (n = 410) or everolimus (n = 411); 803 patients were treated (406 with nivolumab and 397 with everolimus). With a minimum follow-up of 64 months (median, 72 months), nivolumab maintained an OS benefit in comparison with everolimus (median, 25.8 months [95% CI, 22.2-29.8 months] vs 19.7 months [95% CI, 17.6-22.1 months]; hazard ratio [HR], 0.73; 95% CI, 0.62-0.85) with 5-year OS probabilities of 26% and 18%, respectively. ORR was higher with nivolumab (94 of 410 [23%] vs 17 of 411 [4%]; P < .001). PFS also favored nivolumab (HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.72-0.99; P = .0331). The most common treatment-related adverse events of any grade were fatigue (34.7%) and pruritus (15.5%) with nivolumab and fatigue (34.5%) and stomatitis (29.5%) with everolimus. HRQOL improved from baseline with nivolumab but remained the same or deteriorated with everolimus. CONCLUSIONS: The superior efficacy of nivolumab over everolimus is maintained after extended follow-up with no new safety signals, and this supports the long-term benefits of nivolumab monotherapy in patients with previously treated aRCC. LAY SUMMARY: CheckMate 025 compared the effects of nivolumab (a novel immunotherapy) with those of everolimus (an older standard-of-care therapy) for the treatment of advanced kidney cancer in patients who had progressed on antiangiogenic therapy. After 5 years of study, nivolumab continues to be better than everolimus in extending the lives of patients, providing a long-lasting response to treatment, and improving quality of life with a manageable safety profile. The results demonstrate that the clinical benefits of nivolumab versus everolimus in previously treated patients with advanced kidney cancer continue in the long term.

CheckMate 025 Randomized Phase 3 Study: Outcomes by Key Baseline Factors and Prior Therapy for Nivolumab Versus Everolimus in Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The randomized, phase 3 CheckMate 025 study of nivolumab (n=410) versus everolimus (n=411) in previously treated adults (75% male; 88% white) with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) demonstrated significantly improved overall survival (OS) and objective response rate (ORR). OBJECTIVE: To investigate which baseline factors were associated with OS and ORR benefit with nivolumab versus everolimus. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Subgroup OS analyses were performed using Kaplan-Meier methodology. Hazard ratios were estimated using the Cox proportional hazards model. INTERVENTION: Nivolumab 3mg/kg every 2 wk or everolimus 10mg once daily. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The minimum follow-up was 14 mo. Baseline subgroup distributions were balanced between nivolumab and everolimus arms. Nivolumab demonstrated an OS improvement versus everolimus across subgroups, including Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) and International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium risk groups; age <65 and ≥65 yr; one and two or more sites of metastases; bone, liver, and lung metastases; number of prior therapies; duration of prior therapy; and prior sunitinib, pazopanib, or interleukin-2 therapy. The benefit with nivolumab versus everolimus was noteworthy for patients with poor MSKCC risk (hazard ratio 0.48, 95% confidence interval 0.32-0.70). The mortality rate at 12 mo for all subgroups was lower with nivolumab compared with everolimus. ORR also favored nivolumab. The incidence of grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events across subgroups was lower with nivolumab. Limitations include the post hoc analysis and differing sample sizes between groups. CONCLUSION: The trend for OS and ORR benefit with nivolumab for multiple subgroups, without notable safety concerns, may help to guide treatment decisions, and further supports nivolumab as the standard of care in previously treated patients with aRCC. PATIENT SUMMARY: We investigated the impact of demographic and pretreatment features on survival benefit and tumor response with nivolumab versus everolimus in advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC). Survival benefit and response were observed for multiple subgroups, supporting the use of nivolumab as a new standard of care across a broad range of patients with previously treated aRCC. The trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT01668784.

Circulating Tumor Cell Composition in Renal Cell Carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Due to their minimal-invasive yet potentially current character circulating tumor cells (CTC) might be useful as a "liquid biopsy" in solid tumors. However, successful application in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has been very limited so far. High plasticity and heterogeneity of CTC morphology challenges currently available enrichment and detection techniques with EpCAM as the usual surface marker being underrepresented in mRCC. We recently described a method that enables us to identify and characterize non-hematopoietic cells in the peripheral blood stream with varying characteristics and define CTC subgroups that distinctly associate to clinical parameters. With this pilot study we wanted to scrutinize feasibility of this approach and its potential usage in clinical studies. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Peripheral blood was drawn from 14 consecutive mRCC patients at the West German Cancer Center and CTC profiles were analyzed by Multi-Parameter Immunofluorescence Microscopy (MPIM). Additionally angiogenesis-related genes were measured by quantitative RT-PCR analysis. RESULTS: We detected CTC with epithelial, mesenchymal, stem cell-like or mixed-cell characteristics at different time-points during anti-angiogenic therapy. The presence and quantity of N-cadherin-positive or CD133-positive CTC was associated with inferior PFS. There was an inverse correlation between high expression of HIF1A, VEGFA, VEGFR and FGFR and the presence of N-cadherin-positive and CD133-positive CTC. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with mRCC exhibit distinct CTC profiles that may implicate differences in therapeutic outcome. Prospective evaluation of phenotypic and genetic CTC profiling as prognostic and predictive biomarker in mRCC is warranted.

Nivolumab versus Everolimus in Advanced Renal-Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Nivolumab, a programmed death 1 (PD-1) checkpoint inhibitor, was associated with encouraging overall survival in uncontrolled studies involving previously treated patients with advanced renal-cell carcinoma. This randomized, open-label, phase 3 study compared nivolumab with everolimus in patients with renal-cell carcinoma who had received previous treatment. METHODS: A total of 821 patients with advanced clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma for which they had received previous treatment with one or two regimens of antiangiogenic therapy were randomly assigned (in a 1:1 ratio) to receive 3 mg of nivolumab per kilogram of body weight intravenously every 2 weeks or a 10-mg everolimus tablet orally once daily. The primary end point was overall survival. The secondary end points included the objective response rate and safety. RESULTS: The median overall survival was 25.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 21.8 to not estimable) with nivolumab and 19.6 months (95% CI, 17.6 to 23.1) with everolimus. The hazard ratio for death with nivolumab versus everolimus was 0.73 (98.5% CI, 0.57 to 0.93; P=0.002), which met the prespecified criterion for superiority (P≤0.0148). The objective response rate was greater with nivolumab than with everolimus (25% vs. 5%; odds ratio, 5.98 [95% CI, 3.68 to 9.72]; P<0.001). The median progression-free survival was 4.6 months (95% CI, 3.7 to 5.4) with nivolumab and 4.4 months (95% CI, 3.7 to 5.5) with everolimus (hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.75 to 1.03; P=0.11). Grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 19% of the patients receiving nivolumab and in 37% of the patients receiving everolimus; the most common event with nivolumab was fatigue (in 2% of the patients), and the most common event with everolimus was anemia (in 8%). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with previously treated advanced renal-cell carcinoma, overall survival was longer and fewer grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred with nivolumab than with everolimus. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb; CheckMate 025 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01668784.).

Impact of hand-foot skin reaction on treatment outcome in patients receiving capecitabine plus erlotinib for advanced pancreatic cancer: a subgroup analysis from AIO-PK0104.

BACKGROUND: Drug-induced skin toxicity may correlate with treatment efficacy in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy or biological agents. The correlation of the capecitabine-associated hand-foot skin reaction (HFS) on outcome parameters in pancreatic cancer (PC) has not yet been investigated. METHODS: Within the multicentre phase III AIO-PK0104 trial, patients with confirmed advanced PC were randomly assigned to first-line treatment with either capecitabine plus erlotinib (150 mg/day, arm A) or gemcitabine plus erlotinib (150 mg/day, arm B). A cross-over to either gemcitabine (arm A) or capecitabine (arm B) was performed after failure of the first-line regimen. Data on skin toxicity were correlated with efficacy study endpoints using uni- and multivariate analyses. To control for guarantee-time bias (GTB), we focused on subgroup analyses of patients who had completed two and three or more treatment cycles. RESULTS: Of 281 randomised patients, skin toxicity data were available for 255 patients. Median time to capecitabine-attributed HFS was two cycles, 36 of 47 (77%) HFS events had been observed by the end of treatment cycle three. Considering HFS during first-line treatment in 101 patients treated with capecitabine for at least two cycles within the capecitabine plus erlotinib arm, time to treatment failure after first- and second-line therapy (TTF2) and overall survival (OS) both were significantly prolonged for the 44 patients (44%) with HFS compared to 57 patients without HFS (56%) (TTF2: 7.8 vs. 3.8 months, HR 0.50, p = 0.001; OS: 10.4 vs. 5.9 months, HR 0.55, p = 0.005). A subgroup analysis of 70 patients on treatment with capecitabine for at least three cycles showed similar results (TTF2: 8.3 vs. 4.4 months, HR 0.53, p = 0.010; OS: 10.4 vs. 6.7 months, HR 0.62, p = 0.056). CONCLUSION: The present subgroup analysis from AIO-PK0104 suggests that HFS may serve as an independent clinical predictor for treatment outcome in capecitabine-treated patients with advanced PC.

pERK, pAKT and p53 as tissue biomarkers in erlotinib-treated patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: a translational subgroup analysis from AIO-PK0104.

BACKGROUND: The role of pERK, pAKT and p53 as biomarkers in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer has not yet been defined. METHODS: Within the phase III study AIO-PK0104 281 patients with advanced pancreatic cancer received an erlotinib-based 1st-line regimen. Archival tissue from 153 patients was available for central immunohistochemistry staining for pERK, pAKT and p53. Within a subgroup analysis, biomarker data were correlated with efficacy endpoints and skin rash using a Cox regression model. RESULTS: Fifty-five out of 153 patients were classified as pERKlow and 98 patients as pERKhigh; median overall survival (OS) was 6.2 months and 5.7 months, respectively (HR 1.29, p = 0.16). When analysing pERK as continuous variable, the pERK score was significantly associated with OS (HR 1.06, 95% CI 1.0-1.12, p = 0.05). Twenty-one of 35 patients were pAKTlow and 14/35 pAKThigh with a corresponding median OS of 6.4 months and 6.8 months, respectively (HR 1.03, p = 0.93). Four out of 50 patients had a complete loss of p53 expression, 20 patients a regular expression and 26 patients had tumors with p53 overexpression. The p53 status had no impact on OS (p = 0.91); however, a significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) (6.0 vs 1.8 months, HR 0.24, p = 0.02) and a higher rate of skin rash (84% vs 25%, p = 0.02) was observed for patients with a regular p53 expression compared to patients with a complete loss of p53. CONCLUSION: pERK expression may have an impact on OS in erlotinib-treated patients with advanced pancreatic cancer; p53 should be further investigated for its potential role as a predictive marker for PFS and skin rash. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00440167 (registration date: February 22, 2007).

Assessment of folate receptor-α and epidermal growth factor receptor expression in pemetrexed-treated non-small-cell lung cancer patients.

INTRODUCTION: Folate receptor-α regulates cellular uptake of folates and antifolates (eg, pemetrexed) and is frequently expressed in pulmonary adenocarcinoma. EGFR is an established therapeutic target in NSCLC. Therapies targeting FRA or EGFR are available. The association between FRA and EGFR expression in advanced NSCLC has not been explored. Combining therapeutic FRA antibodies with an EGFR inhibitor might be beneficial, if both of the targets are significantly coexpressed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Specimens from 160 advanced NSCLC patients receiving pemetrexed-based chemotherapy were assessed for membranous FRA and EGFR protein expression using immunohistochemistry and the Hybrid (H)-score. EGFR (exons 18-21) and Kirsten RNA-associated rat sarcoma 2 virus (exon 2) mutations were determined. Results were correlated to patients' clinicopathological data, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Forty-seven patients (29%) had tumors with strong FRA and EGFR expression, but no statistically significant correlation was seen between protein levels of FRA and EGFR. High membranous FRA expression (H-score ≥ 20) was associated with prolonged PFS (5.5 vs. 3.4 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.6060; P = .0254) and improved OS (12.1 vs. 6.4 months; HR, 0.5726; P = .0076). CONCLUSION: Survival times are improved in NSCLC patients whose tumors show strong membranous FRA expression. No statistical correlation between membranous FRA and EGFR expression was demonstrated in advanced NSCLC, but 47 patients (29%) had higher expression of both of the receptors and could be suitable for combined targeted therapies.

Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI parameters as biomarkers for the effect of vatalanib in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer.

AIMS: To assess the utility of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI parameters in the demonstration of early antiangiogenic effects and as prognostic biomarkers in second-line treatment of advanced-stage non-small-cell lung cancer with vatalanib. PATIENTS & METHODS: The transfer constant (K(trans)) and the initial area under the contrast concentration-time curve at 60 s (AUC60) were assessed in 46 patients. Changes were compared with response evaluation from computed tomography imaging and Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors guidelines. RESULTS: Statistically significant mean reductions in K(trans) (38.4%; p < 0.0001) and AUC60 (24.9%; p < 0.0001) were found at day 2. After 12 weeks, 16 patients (35%) demonstrated stable disease and 30 (65%) demonstrated progressive disease. No statistically significant differences in day 2 K(trans) and AUC60 reductions between stable disease and progressive disease patients were found. CONCLUSION: Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI can demonstrate a statistically significant reduction in vascular parameters of non-small-cell lung cancer, but does not predict patient outcome.

An open-label single-arm, phase II trial of zalutumumab, a human monoclonal anti-EGFR antibody, in patients with platinum-refractory squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck.

PURPOSE: Treatment options for patients with platinum-refractory recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (R/M SCCHN) are limited. The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of zalutumumab in platinum-refractory R/M SCCHN. METHODS: Patients with platinum-refractory R/M SCCHN were enrolled if they had performance status of 0-2, age ≥18 years and adequate organ function. Patients received weekly infusions of zalutumumab individually titrated to a grade 2 skin rash. Primary objective was overall survival (OS), and secondary objectives were efficacy and safety. A subgroup analysis of OS and progression-free survival (PFS) was conducted for various demographic, disease-related and molecular factors. RESULTS: Ninety patients were enrolled. Twenty-three percent of patients had performance status (PS) 2 and 74 % had distant metastases. Median OS was 5.3 months (95 % CI [4.1, 7.1]), and median PFS was 2.1 months (95 % CI [2.0, 2.6]). Subgroup analysis by ECOG PS revealed median OS of 6.3 months for PS = 0-1 and 2.5 months for PS = 2. Objective response rate was 5.7 %, and disease control rate was 39.8 %. Grade 3-4 adverse events related to zalutumumab were observed in 19 % of patients and included skin rash (5 %), hypomagnesemia (4 %) and pneumonitis (1 %). The frequency of all-cause grade 3-4 AEs was 62 % and included infections (14 %), gastrointestinal disorders (12 %) and hypokalemia (6 %). Two deaths were deemed related to zalutumumab [ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00542308]. CONCLUSIONS: Zalutumumab showed reasonable efficacy in platinum-refractory R/M SCCHN patients, and dose titration based on skin rash evaluation was feasible.

Development of a highly sensitive and specific method for detection of circulating tumor cells harboring somatic mutations in non-small-cell lung cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Oncogenic mutations are powerful predictive biomarkers for molecularly targeted cancer therapies. For mutation detection patients have to undergo invasive tumor biopsies. Alternatively, archival samples are used which may no longer reflect the actual tumor status. Circulating tumor cells (CTC) could serve as an alternative platform to detect somatic mutations in cancer patients. We sought to develop a sensitive and specific assay to detect mutations in the EGFR gene in CTC from lung cancer patients. METHODS: We developed a novel assay based on real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and melting curve analysis to detect activating EGFR mutations in blood cell fractions enriched in CTC. Non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) was chosen as disease model with reportedly very low CTC counts. The assay was prospectively validated in samples from patients with EGFR-mutant and EGFR-wild type NSCLC treated within a randomized clinical trial. Sequential analyses were conducted to monitor CTC signals during therapy and correlate mutation detection in CTC with treatment outcome. RESULTS: Assay sensitivity was optimized to enable detection of a single EGFR-mutant CTC/mL peripheral blood. CTC were detected in pretreatment blood samples from all 8 EGFR-mutant lung cancer patients studied. Loss of EGFR-mutant CTC signals correlated with treatment response, and its reoccurrence preceded relapse. CONCLUSIONS: Despite low abundance of CTC in NSCLC oncogenic mutations can be reproducibly detected by applying an unbiased CTC enrichment strategy and highly sensitive PCR and melting curve analysis. This strategy may enable non-invasive, specific biomarker diagnostics and monitoring in patients undergoing targeted cancer therapies.

Preclinical and clinical development of afatinib: a focus on breast cancer and squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck.

Aberrant signaling of the ErbB family of receptors plays an integral role in the tumorigenesis of many cancer types, including head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) and breast cancer (BC). Significant research efforts have focused on developing new treatments that target ErbB family members, with the last decade seeing the approval of small-molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitors and monoclonal antibodies that inhibit ErbB signaling. However, treatment resistance is an ever-growing problem and, therefore, new therapies are being investigated to overcome this hurdle. Afatinib is an irreversible ErbB family blocker that has demonstrated potent anti-tumor activity in preclinical models and has displayed clinical efficacy in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer, and activity in HNSCC and BC. Here, the preclinical and clinical development of afatinib in the treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer, HNSCC and BC is described in the context of currently approved agents.

Feasibility of preemptive biomarker profiling for personalised early clinical drug development at a Comprehensive Cancer Center.

PURPOSE: Multiple investigational drugs are currently explored in cancer patient populations defined by specific biomarkers. This demands a new process of patient selection for clinical trials. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Starting January 1, 2012, preemptive biomarker profiling was offered at the West German Cancer Center to all patients with advanced non-small-cell lung (NSCLC) or colorectal cancer (CRC), who met generic study inclusion criteria. Tumour specimens were subjected to prespecified profiling algorithms to detect 'actionable biomarkers' by amplicon sequencing, in situ hybridisation and immunohistochemistry. The clinical course was closely monitored to offer trial participation whenever applicable. RESULTS: Within 12 months, 267 patients (188 NSCLC, 79 CRC) were profiled. Estimated additional cost for biomarker profiling was 219615.51 EUR excluding histopathology workup and administration. The most prevalent biomarkers in pulmonary adenocarcinoma were KRAS mutations (29%), loss of PTEN expression (18%), EGFR mutations (9%), HER2 amplification (5%) and BRAF mutations (3%), while the prevalence of ALK translocations and PIK3CA mutations was extremely low. In pulmonary squamous cell carcinoma FGFR1 amplifications were found in 15%, PTEN expression was lost in 20% and DDR2 was mutated in a single case. KRAS mutations (41%) predominated in CRC, followed by loss of PTEN expression (16%), PIK3CA (5%) and BRAF (5%) mutations. So far 13 patients (5%) have entered biomarker-stratified clinical trials. Therapeutic decisions for approved drugs were guided in another 45 patients (17%). CONCLUSION: Preemptive biomarker profiling can be implemented into the diagnostic algorithm of a large Comprehensive Cancer Center. Substantial investments in diagnostics and administration are required.

Gemcitabine plus erlotinib followed by capecitabine versus capecitabine plus erlotinib followed by gemcitabine in advanced pancreatic cancer: final results of a randomised phase 3 trial of the 'Arbeitsgemeinschaft Internistische Onkologie' (AIO-PK0104).

OBJECTIVE: AIO-PK0104 investigated two treatment strategies in advanced pancreatic cancer (PC): a reference sequence of gemcitabine/erlotinib followed by 2nd-line capecitabine was compared with a reverse experimental sequence of capecitabine/erlotinib followed by gemcitabine. METHODS: 281 patients with PC were randomly assigned to 1st-line treatment with either gemcitabine plus erlotinib or capecitabine plus erlotinib. In case of treatment failure (eg, disease progression or toxicity), patients were allocated to 2nd-line treatment with the comparator cytostatic drug without erlotinib. The primary study endpoint was time to treatment failure (TTF) after 1st- and 2nd-line therapy (TTF2; non-inferiority design). KRAS exon 2 mutations were analysed in archival tumour tissue from 173 of the randomised patients. RESULTS: Of the 274 eligible patients, 43 had locally advanced and 231 had metastatic disease; 140 (51%) received 2nd-line chemotherapy. Median TTF2 was estimated with 4.2 months in both arms; median overall survival was 6.2 months with gemcitabine/erlotinib followed by capecitabine and 6.9 months with capecitabine/erlotinib followed by gemcitabine, respectively (HR 1.02, p=0.90). TTF for 1st-line therapy (TTF1) was significantly prolonged with gemcitabine/erlotinib compared to capecitabine/erlotinib (3.2 vs 2.2 months; HR 0.69, p=0.0034). Skin rash was associated with both TTF2 (rash grade 0/1/2-4:2.9/4.3/6.7 months, p<0.0001) and survival (3.4/7.0/9.6 months, p<0.0001). Each arm showed a safe and manageable toxicity profile during 1st- and 2nd-line therapy. A KRAS wild-type status (52/173 patients, 30%) was associated with an improved overall survival (HR 1.68, p=0.005). CONCLUSION: Both treatment strategies are feasible and demonstrated comparable efficacy; KRAS may serve as biomarker in patients with advanced PC treated with erlotinib.

Significance of folate receptor alpha and thymidylate synthase protein expression in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer treated with pemetrexed.

INTRODUCTION: Folate receptor alpha (FRA) regulates cellular uptake of folates and antifolates. Information about FRA protein expression in metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is limited. We investigated FRA as a biomarker for pemetrexed-based chemotherapy and compared it with thymidylate synthase (TS), the main target of pemetrexed. METHODS: Pretreatment tumor specimens from 207 patients with advanced NSCLC were assessed for FRA and TS protein expression by immunohistochemistry using the H-score (range, 0-300) and correlated to patients' clinicopathological data, radiographic response, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Low total (cytoplasmic and nuclear) TS protein expression (H-score < 210) was associated with improved PFS (median: 5.6 versus 3.5 months; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.6379, p = 0.0131) and prolonged OS (median: 22.5 versus 11.5 months; HR = 0.5680,p = 0.0107). An association between lower TS levels and response to pemetrexed-based therapy was found-mean H-score 187 ± 5, median 180 for responders versus mean H-score 201 ± 4, median 210, for non-responders, p = 0.0244. High intracellular FRA expression (H-score ≥110) was associated with prolonged OS (28.9 versus 11.7 months, HR = 0.5316, p = 0.0040) and a trend for association with PFS (5.6 versus 4.1 months, HR = 0.7395, p = 0.0801) was noted. Membranous FRA expression was seen in 83% of patients, moreover, high membranous expression (H-score ≥20) was associated with improved PFS (5.6 versus 3.7 months, HR = 0.6445, p = 0.0306) and OS (22.1 versus 11.5 months, HR = 0.5378, p = 0.0131). CONCLUSIONS: A large number of NSCLC patients have high expression of FRA and/or a low level of TS expression. Expression levels of FRA and TS were associated with clinical benefit from pemetrexed therapy.

Folylpoly-glutamate synthetase expression is associated with tumor response and outcome from pemetrexed-based chemotherapy in malignant pleural mesothelioma.

BACKGROUND: Pemetrexed-based chemotherapy represents the standard of care in first-line treatment of advanced malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). However, there are no established predictors of clinical benefit. Pemetrexed inhibits multiple enzymes involved in pyrimidine and purine synthesis, but the main target is thymidylate synthase (TS). After cellular uptake pemetrexed is converted into more effective polyglutamated forms by folylpoly-γ-glutamate synthetase (FPGS). We hypothesized that FPGS and TS protein expressions are associated with clinical outcome after pemetrexed-based chemotherapy. METHODS: Pretreatment tumor samples from 84 patients with histologically confirmed MPM, who received pemetrexed combined with platinum (79 of 84) or single-agent pemetrexed (5 of 84) as first-line treatment, were retrospectively analyzed. FPGS and TS protein expressions were semiquantitatively assessed by using the Hybrid (H)-scoring system (range, 0-300). H-scores were correlated with radiological response according to modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Median H-score of the entire cohort was 230 for FPGS (range, 100-300), and 210 for TS (range, 100-300). High FPGS protein expression was significantly associated with longer PFS (pCOX = 0.0337), better objective tumor response (partial response versus stable disease + progressive disease; pKW = 0.003), and improved disease-control rate (partial response + stable disease versus progressive disease; pKW = 0.0208), but not with OS. In addition, high TS protein expression was associated with progressive disease under pemetrexed-based therapy (p = 0.0383), and shorter OS (pCOX = 0.0071), but no association with PFS was observed. CONCLUSION: FPGS and TS expressions were associated with clinical response and outcome to pemetrexed-based first-line chemotherapy in MPM. Prospective evaluation of FPGS and TS expressions and their prognostic/predictive power in MPM patients is warranted.

Phase I open-label study of cediranib, an oral inhibitor of VEGF signalling, in combination with the oral Src inhibitor saracatinib in patients with advanced solid tumours.

UNLABELLED: Combining different targeted anticancer agents may improve clinical outcomes. This Phase I study investigated cediranib, an oral inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor signalling in combination with saracatinib, an oral Src inhibitor. The primary endpoint was safety/tolerability. Secondary assessments included pharmacokinetics and preliminary efficacy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced solid tumours received cediranib 20, 30 or 45 mg/day for 7 days followed by daily treatment with cediranib at the same dose plus saracatinib 175 mg/day. RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients received cediranib (20 mg, n = 6; 30 mg, n = 6; 45 mg, n = 27 [n = 20 in cohort expansion]) plus saracatinib. In the cediranib 45 mg cohort, 59% of patients required dose reduction/pause compared with 33% in each of the other two cohorts. There was one dose-limiting toxicity (hypertension; 45 mg cohort). The most common adverse events were hypertension (67%), diarrhoea (62%), dysphonia (46%) and fatigue (39%). There was no evidence of a clinically significant effect of saracatinib on cediranib pharmacokinetics and vice versa. 22/35 evaluable patients had a best response of stable disease. CONCLUSIONS: All cediranib doses were tolerated; however, in patients with advanced solid tumours, for combination with saracatinib 175 mg/day, cediranib 20 or 30 mg/day was more sustainable than 45 mg/day.