Prognostic value of liver metastases in colorectal cancer treated by systemic therapy: An ARCAD pooled analysis.

BACKGROUND: The liver is the most frequent site of metastases in colorectal cancer (CRC). This study aimed to assess the response rate and survival outcomes in metastatic CRC patients with non-liver metastases (NLM) compared to those with liver metastases (LM) across different lines of treatment. METHODS: A total of 17,924 mCRC patients included in 26 trials from the ARCAD CRC database were analyzed. The analysis was conducted based on the presence or absence of LM across different treatment groups: chemotherapy (CT) alone, CT + anti-VEGF, CT + anti-EGFR in KRAS wild-type tumors, within the first-line (1 L) and second-line (2 L), and patients enrolled in third-line (≥3 L) trials treated with trifluridine/tipiracil or regorafenib or placebo. The endpoints were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall response rate (ORR). RESULTS: Out of the 17,924 patients, 14,066 had LM (30.6 % with only liver involvement and 69.4 % with liver and other metastatic sites), while 3858 patients had NLM. In the CT alone and CT + anti-VEGF subgroups, NLM patients showed better OS and PFS in the 1 L and 2 L settings. However, in the CT + anti-EGFR 1 L and 2 L subgroups, there was no significant difference in OS and PFS between NLM and LM patients. In the ≥ 3 L subgroups, better OS and PFS were observed in NLM patients. ORRs were higher in LM patients than in NLM patients across all cohorts treated in the 1 L and only in the anti-EGFR cohort in the 2 L. CONCLUSION: LM is a poor prognostic factor for mCRC increasing from 1 L to ≥ 3 L except for patients in 1 L and 2 L receiving CT+anti-EGFR. These data justify using LM as a stratification factor in future trials for patients with unresectable mCRC.

Onvansertib in Combination with FOLFIRI and Bevacizumab in Second-Line Treatment of KRAS-Mutant Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Phase Ib Clinical Study.

PURPOSE: Onvansertib is a highly specific inhibitor of polo-like kinase 1 (PLK1), with demonstrated safety in solid tumors. We evaluated, preclinically and clinically, the potential of onvansertib in combination with chemotherapy as a therapeutic option for KRAS-mutant colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Preclinical activity of onvansertib was assessed (i) in vitro in KRAS wild-type and -mutant isogenic colorectal cancer cells and (ii) in vivo, in combination with irinotecan, in a KRAS-mutant xenograft model. Clinically, a phase Ib trial was conducted to investigate onvansertib at doses 12, 15, and 18 mg/m2 (days 1-5 and 14-19 of a 28-day cycle) in combination with FOLFIRI/bevacizumab (days 1 and 15) in patients with KRAS-mutant metastatic colorectal cancer who had prior oxaliplatin exposure. Safety, efficacy, and changes in circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) were assessed. RESULTS: In preclinical models, onvansertib displayed superior activity in KRAS-mutant than wild-type isogenic colorectal cancer cells and demonstrated potent antitumor activity in combination with irinotecan in vivo. Eighteen patients enrolled in the phase Ib study. Onvansertib recommended phase II dose was established at 15 mg/m2. Grade 3 and 4 adverse events (AE) represented 15% of all treatment-related AEs, with neutropenia being the most common. Partial responses were observed in 44% of patients, with a median duration of response of 9.5 months. Early ctDNA dynamics were predictive of treatment efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: Onvansertib combined with FOLIFRI/bevacizumab exhibited manageable safety and promising efficacy in second-line treatment of patients with KRAS-mutant metastatic colorectal cancer. Further exploration of this combination therapy is ongoing. See related commentary by Stebbing and Bullock, p. 2005.

Evaluation of Intratumoral Response Heterogeneity in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer and Its Impact on Patient Overall Survival: Findings from 10,551 Patients in the ARCAD Database.

Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is a heterogeneous disease that can evoke discordant responses to therapy among different lesions in individual patients. The Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria do not take into consideration response heterogeneity. We explored and developed lesion-based measurement response criteria to evaluate their prognostic effect on overall survival (OS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients enrolled in 17 first-line clinical trials, who had mCRC with ≥ 2 lesions at baseline, and a restaging scan by 12 weeks were included. For each patient, lesions were categorized as a progressing lesion (PL: > 20% increase in the longest diameter (LD)), responding lesion (RL: > 30% decrease in LD), or stable lesion (SL: neither PL nor RL) based on the 12-week scan. Lesion-based response criteria were defined for each patient as follows: PL only, SL only, RL only, and varied responses (mixture of RL, SL, and PL). Lesion-based response criteria and OS were correlated using stratified multivariable Cox models. The concordance between OS and classifications was measured using the C statistic. RESULTS: Among 10,551 patients with mCRC from 17 first-line studies, varied responses were noted in 51.6% of patients, among whom, 3.3% had RL/PL at 12 weeks. Among patients with RL/SL, 52% had stable disease (SD) by RECIST 1.1, and they had a longer OS (median OS (mOS) = 19.9 months) than those with SL only (mOS = 16.8 months, HR (95% CI) = 0.81 (0.76, 0.85), p < 0.001), although a shorter OS than those with RL only (mOS = 25.8 months, HR (95% CI) = 1.42 (1.32, 1.53), p < 0.001). Among patients with SL/PL, 74% had SD by RECIST 1.1, and they had a longer OS (mOS = 9.0 months) than those with PL only (mOS = 8.0 months, HR (95% CI) = 0.75 (0.57, 0.98), p = 0.040), yet a shorter OS than those with SL only (mOS = 16.8 months, HR (95% CI) = 1.98 (1.80, 2.18), p < 0.001). These associations were consistent across treatment regimen subgroups. The lesion-based response criteria showed slightly higher concordance than RECIST 1.1, although it was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Varied responses at first restaging are common among patients receiving first-line therapy for mCRC. Our lesion-based measurement criteria allowed for better mortality discrimination, which could potentially be informative for treatment decision-making and influence patient outcomes.

Randomized Phase II Trial Comparing Bevacizumab Plus Carboplatin and Paclitaxel With Carboplatin and Paclitaxel Alone in Previously Untreated Locally Advanced or Metastatic Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

PURPOSE: To investigate the efficacy and safety of bevacizumab plus carboplatin and paclitaxel in patients with advanced or recurrent non-small-cell lung cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a phase II trial, 99 patients were randomly assigned to bevacizumab 7.5 (n = 32) or 15 mg/kg (n = 35) plus carboplatin (area under the curve = 6) and paclitaxel (200 mg/m2) every 3 weeks or carboplatin and paclitaxel alone (n = 32). Primary efficacy end points were time to disease progression and best confirmed response rate. On disease progression, patients in the control arm had the option to receive single-agent bevacizumab 15 mg/kg every 3 weeks. RESULTS: Compared with the control arm, treatment with carboplatin and paclitaxel plus bevacizumab (15 mg/kg) resulted in a higher response rate (31.5% v 18.8%), longer median time to progression (7.4 v 4.2 months) and a modest increase in survival (17.7 v 14.9 months). Of the 19 control patients that crossed over to single-agent bevacizumab, five experienced stable disease, and 1-year survival was 47%. Bleeding was the most prominent adverse event and was manifested in two distinct clinical patterns; minor mucocutaneous hemorrhage and major hemoptysis. Major hemoptysis was associated with squamous cell histology, tumor necrosis and cavitation, and disease location close to major blood vessels. CONCLUSION: Bevacizumab in combination with carboplatin and paclitaxel improved overall response and time to progression in patients with advanced or recurrent non-small-cell lung cancer. Patients with nonsquamous cell histology appear to be a subpopulation with improved outcome and acceptable safety risks.

Evaluating sex as a predictive marker for response to bevacizumab in metastatic colorectal carcinoma: Pooled analysis of 3,369 patients in the ARCAD database.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies suggest a possible sex-specific response to bevacizumab in metastatic colorectal carcinoma (mCRC), showing a benefit in males, while the effect in females is less significant. METHODS: Data from 3369 patients with mCRC enrolled on four first-line randomised trials testing chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab (2000-2007) were pooled. Association between sex and progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) was evaluated by stratified Cox regression model, adjusted for potential confounders. Predictive value was evaluated by interaction effect between sex and treatment. In a pre-planned secondary analysis, analyses were stratified using an age cut point of 60 years to evaluate the possible role of menopausal-related effects. RESULTS: Bevacizumab was associated with an improved median OS in males and females, with a 2.3- and 0.6-months benefit, respectively. Stratified by age, bevacizumab resulted in improved OS in males at both age categories. In females at or above the age of 60 (n = 731), bevacizumab resulted in improved OS. However, in females below the age of 60 (n = 634), OS benefit did not reach statistical significance (adjusted hazard ratio = 0.94, 95% confidence interval 0.74-1.20). CONCLUSIONS: Our results confirmed the OS benefit from the addition of bevacizumab to first-line chemotherapy in mCRC in both sexes. Among females, the benefit was less than 1 month. For females under the age of 60, there was no survival benefit. These findings could be used to relieve financial toxicity or be redistributed within healthcare systems for other health-related purposes.

Trajectories of body weight change and survival among patients with mCRC treated with systemic therapy: Pooled analysis from the ARCAD database.

BACKGROUND: Higher body mass index is associated with a higher incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) but also with improved survival in metastatic CRC (mCRC). Whether weight change after mCRC diagnosis is associated with survival remains largely unknown. METHODS: We analysed individual patient data for previously untreated patients enrolled in five phase 3 randomised trials conducted between 1998 and 2006. Weight measurements were prospectively collected at baseline and up to 59.4 months after diagnosis. We used stratified multivariable Cox models to assess the prognostic associations of weight loss with overall and progression-free survival, adjusting for other factors. The primary end-point was a difference in overall survival (OS) between populations with weight loss and stable or increasing weight. FINDINGS: Data were available for 3504 patients. The median weight change at 3 months was -0.54% (IQR -3.9 … +1.5%). We identified a linear trend of increasing risk of death associated with progressive weight loss. Unstratified median OS was 20.5, 18.0, and 11.9 months (p < 0.001) for stable weight or gain, <5% weight loss, and ≥5% weight loss at 3 months, respectively. Weight loss was associated with a higher risk of death (<5% loss: aHR 1.18 [1.06-1.30], p < 0.002; ≥5% loss: aHR 1.87 [1.67-2.1], p < 0.001) as compared to stable or increasing weight at 3 months post-baseline (reference), while adjusting for age, sex, performance, and a number of metastatic sites. INTERPRETATION: Patients losing weight during systemic therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer have significantly shorter OS. The degree of weight loss is proportional to the observed increased risk of death and remains evident among underweight, normal weight, and obese individuals. On-treatment weight change could be used as an intermediate end-point. FUNDING: The creation and management of the database containing the individual patient data from the original randomised trials is supported by the Aide et Recherche en Cancérologie Digestive Foundation.

Impact of geography on prognostic outcomes of 21,509 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer enrolled in clinical trials: an ARCAD database analysis.

BACKGROUND: Benchmarking international cancer survival differences is necessary to evaluate and improve healthcare systems. Our aim was to assess the potential regional differences in outcomes among patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) participating in international randomized clinical trials (RCTs). DESIGN: Countries were grouped into 11 regions according to the World Health Organization and the EUROCARE model. Meta-analyses based on individual patient data were used to synthesize data across studies and regions and to conduct comparisons for outcomes in a two-stage random-effects model after adjusting for age, sex, performance status, and time period. We used mCRC patients enrolled in the first-line RCTs from the ARCAD database, which provided enrolling country information. There were 21,509 patients in 27 RCTs included across the 11 regions. RESULTS: Main outcomes were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Compared with other regions, patients from the United Kingdom (UK) and Ireland were proportionaly over-represented, older, with higher performance status, more frequently male, and more commonly not treated with biological therapies. Cohorts from central Europe and the United States (USA) had significantly longer OS compared with those from UK and Ireland (p = 0.0034 and p < 0.001, respectively), with median difference of 3-4 months. The survival deficits in the UK and Ireland cohorts were, at most, 15% at 1 year. No evidence of a regional disparity was observed for PFS. Among those treated without biological therapies, patients from the UK and Ireland had shorter OS than central Europe patients (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Significant international disparities in the OS of cohorts of mCRC patients enrolled in RCTs were found. Survival of mCRC patients included in RCTs was consistently lower in the UK and Ireland regions than in central Europe, southern Europe, and the USA, potentially attributed to greater overall population representation, delayed diagnosis, and reduced availability of therapies.

Efficacy of Neratinib Plus Capecitabine in the Subgroup of Patients with Central Nervous System Involvement from the NALA Trial.

BACKGROUND: Neratinib has efficacy in central nervous system (CNS) metastases from HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC). We report outcomes among patients with CNS metastases at baseline from the phase III NALA trial of neratinib plus capecitabine (N + C) versus lapatinib plus capecitabine (L + C). MATERIALS AND METHODS: NALA was a randomized, active-controlled trial in patients who received two or more previous HER2-directed regimens for HER2-positive MBC. Patients with asymptomatic/stable brain metastases (treated or untreated) were eligible. Patients were assigned to N + C (neratinib 240 mg per day, capecitabine 750 mg/m2 twice daily) or L + C (lapatinib 1,250 mg per day, capecitabine 1,000 mg/m2 twice daily) orally. Independently adjudicated progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and CNS endpoints were considered. RESULTS: Of 621 patients enrolled, 101 (16.3%) had known CNS metastases at baseline (N + C, n = 51; L + C, n = 50); 81 had received prior CNS-directed radiotherapy and/or surgery. In the CNS subgroup, mean PFS through 24 months was 7.8 months with N + C versus 5.5 months with L + C (hazard ratio [HR], 0.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.41-1.05), and mean OS through 48 months was 16.4 versus 15.4 months (HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.59-1.38). At 12 months, cumulative incidence of interventions for CNS disease was 25.5% for N + C versus 36.0% for L + C, and cumulative incidence of progressive CNS disease was 26.2% versus 41.6%, respectively. In patients with target CNS lesions at baseline (n = 32), confirmed intracranial objective response rates were 26.3% and 15.4%, respectively. No new safety signals were observed. CONCLUSION: These analyses suggest improved PFS and CNS outcomes with N + C versus L + C in patients with CNS metastases from HER2-positive MBC. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: In a subgroup of patients with central nervous system (CNS) metastases from HER2-positive breast cancer after two or more previous HER2-directed regimens, the combination of neratinib plus capecitabine was associated with improved progression-free survival and CNS outcomes compared with lapatinib plus capecitabine. These findings build on previous phase II and III studies describing efficacy of neratinib in the prevention and treatment of CNS metastases, and support a role for neratinib as a systemic treatment option in the management of patients with HER2-positive brain metastases following antibody-based HER2-directed therapies.

HBI-8000, HUYABIO Lead Clinical Program, Is a Selective Histone Deacetylase Inhibitor With Therapeutic Benefits in Leukemia and in Solid Tumors.

HBI-8000 is a small molecule inhibitor of class I HDACs and has been approved for the treatment of PTCL, ATL and, in combination with exemestane, in a subpopulation of breast cancer. Given the roles of HDACs in normal and cancerous cells, there are currently multiple clinical trials, by HUYABIO International, to test the efficacy of HBI-8000 in monotherapy or in combination settings in leukemias and in solid tumors. The current review is focused on the applications of HDACi HBI-8000 in cancer therapy and its potential in combination with DDR agents.

Effect of Vocimagene Amiretrorepvec in Combination With Flucytosine vs Standard of Care on Survival Following Tumor Resection in Patients With Recurrent High-Grade Glioma: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: New treatments are needed to improve the prognosis of patients with recurrent high-grade glioma. Objective: To compare overall survival for patients receiving tumor resection followed by vocimagene amiretrorepvec (Toca 511) with flucytosine (Toca FC) vs standard of care (SOC). Design, Setting, and Participants: A randomized, open-label phase 2/3 trial (TOCA 5) in 58 centers in the US, Canada, Israel, and South Korea, comparing posttumor resection treatment with Toca 511 followed by Toca FC vs a defined single choice of approved (SOC) therapies was conducted from November 30, 2015, to December 20, 2019. Patients received tumor resection for first or second recurrence of glioblastoma or anaplastic astrocytoma. Interventions: Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive Toca 511/FC (n = 201) or SOC control (n = 202). For the Toca 511/FC group, patients received Toca 511 injected into the resection cavity wall at the time of surgery, followed by cycles of oral Toca FC 6 weeks after surgery. For the SOC control group, patients received investigators' choice of single therapy: lomustine, temozolomide, or bevacizumab. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was overall survival (OS) in time from randomization date to death due to any cause. Secondary outcomes reported in this study included safety, durable response rate (DRR), duration of DRR, durable clinical benefit rate, OS and DRR by IDH1 variant status, and 12-month OS. Results: All 403 randomized patients (median [SD] age: 56 [11.46] years; 62.5% [252] men) were included in the efficacy analysis, and 400 patients were included in the safety analysis (3 patients on the SOC group did not receive resection). Final analysis included 271 deaths (141 deaths in the Toca 511/FC group and 130 deaths in the SOC control group). The median follow-up was 22.8 months. The median OS was 11.10 months for the Toca 511/FC group and 12.22 months for the control group (hazard ratio, 1.06; 95% CI 0.83, 1.35; P = .62). The secondary end points did not demonstrate statistically significant differences. The rates of adverse events were similar in the Toca 511/FC group and the SOC control group. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients who underwent tumor resection for first or second recurrence of glioblastoma or anaplastic astrocytoma, administration of Toca 511 and Toca FC, compared with SOC, did not improve overall survival or other efficacy end points. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02414165.

Evaluation of Continuous Tumor-Size-Based End Points as Surrogates for Overall Survival in Randomized Clinical Trials in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

Importance: Tumor measurements can be used to estimate time to nadir and depth of nadir as potential surrogates for overall survival (OS). Objective: To assess time to nadir and depth of nadir as surrogates for OS in metastatic colorectal cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: Pooled analysis of 20 randomized clinical trials within the Aide et Recherche en Cancerologie Digestive database, which contains academic and industry-sponsored trials, was conducted. Three sets of comparisons were performed: chemotherapy alone, antiangiogenic agents, and anti-epidermal growth factor receptor agents in first-line treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Main Outcomes and Measures: Surrogacy of time to nadir and depth of nadir was assessed at the trial level based on joint modeling of relative tumor-size change vs baseline and OS. Treatment effects on time to nadir and on depth of nadir were defined in terms of between-arm differences in time to nadir and in depth of nadir, and both were assessed in linear regressions for their correlation with treatment effects (hazard ratios) on OS within each set. The strengths of association were quantified using sample-size-weighted coefficients of determination (R2), with values closer to 1.00 indicating stronger association. At the patient level, the correlation was assessed between modeled relative tumor-size change and OS. Results: For 14 chemotherapy comparisons in 4289 patients, the R2 value was 0.63 (95% CI, 0.30-0.96) for the association between treatment effects on time to nadir and OS and 0.08 (95% CI, 0-0.37) for depth of nadir and OS. For 11 antiangiogenic agent comparisons (4854 patients), corresponding values of R2 were 0.25 (95% CI, 0-0.72) and 0.06 (95% CI, 0-0.35). For 8 anti-epidermal growth factor receptor comparisons (2684 patients), corresponding values of R2 were 0.24 (95% CI, 0-0.83) and 0.21 (95% CI, 0-0.78). Conclusions and Relevance: In contrast with early reports favoring depth of response as a surrogate, these results suggest that neither time to nadir nor depth of nadir is an acceptable surrogate for OS in the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer.

First-Line Atezolizumab plus Chemotherapy in Extensive-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Enhancing tumor-specific T-cell immunity by inhibiting programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1)-programmed death 1 (PD-1) signaling has shown promise in the treatment of extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer. Combining checkpoint inhibition with cytotoxic chemotherapy may have a synergistic effect and improve efficacy. METHODS: We conducted this double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial to evaluate atezolizumab plus carboplatin and etoposide in patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer who had not previously received treatment. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive carboplatin and etoposide with either atezolizumab or placebo for four 21-day cycles (induction phase), followed by a maintenance phase during which they received either atezolizumab or placebo (according to the previous random assignment) until they had unacceptable toxic effects, disease progression according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1, or no additional clinical benefit. The two primary end points were investigator-assessed progression-free survival and overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. RESULTS: A total of 201 patients were randomly assigned to the atezolizumab group, and 202 patients to the placebo group. At a median follow-up of 13.9 months, the median overall survival was 12.3 months in the atezolizumab group and 10.3 months in the placebo group (hazard ratio for death, 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54 to 0.91; P=0.007). The median progression-free survival was 5.2 months and 4.3 months, respectively (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.62 to 0.96; P=0.02). The safety profile of atezolizumab plus carboplatin and etoposide was consistent with the previously reported safety profile of the individual agents, with no new findings observed. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of atezolizumab to chemotherapy in the first-line treatment of extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer resulted in significantly longer overall survival and progression-free survival than chemotherapy alone. (Funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech; IMpower133 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02763579 .).

Personalizing Survival Predictions in Advanced Colorectal Cancer: The ARCAD Nomogram Project.

Background: Estimating prognosis on the basis of clinicopathologic factors can inform clinical practice and improve risk stratification for clinical trials. We constructed prognostic nomograms for one-year overall survival and six-month progression-free survival in metastatic colorectal carcinoma by using the ARCAD database. Methods: Data from 22 674 patients in 26 randomized phase III clinical trials since 1997 were used to construct and validate Cox models, stratified by treatment arm within each study. Candidate variables included baseline age, sex, body mass index, performance status, colon vs rectal cancer, prior chemotherapy, number and location of metastatic sites, tumor mutation status (BRAF, KRAS), bilirubin, albumin, white blood cell count, hemoglobin, platelets, absolute neutrophil count, and derived neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio. Missing data (<11%) were imputed, continuous variables modeled with splines, and clinically relevant pairwise interactions tested if P values were less than .001. Final models were internally validated via bootstrapping to obtain optimism-corrected calibration and discrimination C-indices, and externally validated on a 10% holdout sample from each trial (n = 2257). Results: In final models, all included variables were associated with overall survival except for lung metastases, and all but total white cell count associated with progression-free survival. No clinically relevant pairwise interactions were identified. Final nomogram calibration was good (C = 0.68 for overall and C = 0.62 for progression-free survival), as was external validity (concordance between predicted >50% vs < 50% probability) and actual (yes/no) survival (72.8% and 68.2% concordance, respectively, for one-year overall and six-month progression-free survival, between predicted [>50% vs < 50% probability] and actual [yes/no] overall and progression-free survival). Median survival predictions fell within the actual 95% Kaplan-Meier confidence intervals. Conclusions: The nomograms are well calibrated and internally and externally valid. They have the potential to aid prognostication and patient-physician communication and balance risk in colorectal cancer trials.

Clinical Calculator for Early Mortality in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: An Analysis of Patients From 28 Clinical Trials in the Aide et Recherche en Cancérologie Digestive Database.

Purpose Factors contributing to early mortality after initiation of treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer are poorly understood. Materials and Methods Data from 22,654 patients enrolled in 28 randomized phase III trials contained in the ARCAD (Aide et Recherche en Cancérologie Digestive) database were pooled. Multivariable logistic regression models for 30-, 60-, and 90-day mortality were constructed, including clinically and statistically significant patient and disease factors and interaction terms. A calculator (nomogram) for 90-day mortality was developed and validated internally using bootstrapping methods and externally using a 10% random holdout sample from each trial. The impact of early progression on the likelihood of survival to 90 days was examined with time-dependent Cox proportional hazards models. Results Mortality rates were 1.4% at 30 days, 3.4% at 60 days, and 5.5% at 90 days. Among baseline factors, advanced age, lower body mass index, poorer performance status, increased number of metastatic sites, BRAF mutant status, and several laboratory parameters were associated with increased likelihood of early mortality. A multivariable model for 90-day mortality showed strong internal discrimination (C-index, 0.77) and good calibration across risk groups as well as accurate predictions in the external validation set, both overall and within patient subgroups. Conclusion A validated clinical nomogram has been developed to quantify the risk of early death for individual patients during initial treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. This tool may be used for patient eligibility assessment or risk stratification in future clinical trials and to identify patients requiring more or less aggressive therapy and additional supportive measures during and after treatment.

Atezolizumab versus docetaxel in patients with previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer (OAK): a phase 3, open-label, multicentre randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Atezolizumab is a humanised antiprogrammed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) monoclonal antibody that inhibits PD-L1 and programmed death-1 (PD-1) and PD-L1 and B7-1 interactions, reinvigorating anticancer immunity. We assessed its efficacy and safety versus docetaxel in previously treated patients with non-small-cell lung cancer. METHODS: We did a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial (OAK) in 194 academic or community oncology centres in 31 countries. We enrolled patients who had squamous or non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer, were 18 years or older, had measurable disease per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Patients had received one to two previous cytotoxic chemotherapy regimens (one or more platinum based combination therapies) for stage IIIB or IV non-small-cell lung cancer. Patients with a history of autoimmune disease and those who had received previous treatments with docetaxel, CD137 agonists, anti-CTLA4, or therapies targeting the PD-L1 and PD-1 pathway were excluded. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to intravenously receive either atezolizumab 1200 mg or docetaxel 75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks by permuted block randomisation (block size of eight) via an interactive voice or web response system. Coprimary endpoints were overall survival in the intention-to-treat (ITT) and PD-L1-expression population TC1/2/3 or IC1/2/3 (≥1% PD-L1 on tumour cells or tumour-infiltrating immune cells). The primary efficacy analysis was done in the first 850 of 1225 enrolled patients. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02008227. FINDINGS: Between March 11, 2014, and April 29, 2015, 1225 patients were recruited. In the primary population, 425 patients were randomly assigned to receive atezolizumab and 425 patients were assigned to receive docetaxel. Overall survival was significantly longer with atezolizumab in the ITT and PD-L1-expression populations. In the ITT population, overall survival was improved with atezolizumab compared with docetaxel (median overall survival was 13·8 months [95% CI 11·8-15·7] vs 9·6 months [8·6-11·2]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·73 [95% CI 0·62-0·87], p=0·0003). Overall survival in the TC1/2/3 or IC1/2/3 population was improved with atezolizumab (n=241) compared with docetaxel (n=222; median overall survival was 15·7 months [95% CI 12·6-18·0] with atezolizumab vs 10·3 months [8·8-12·0] with docetaxel; HR 0·74 [95% CI 0·58-0·93]; p=0·0102). Patients in the PD-L1 low or undetectable subgroup (TC0 and IC0) also had improved survival with atezolizumab (median overall survival 12·6 months vs 8·9 months; HR 0·75 [95% CI 0·59-0·96]). Overall survival improvement was similar in patients with squamous (HR 0·73 [95% CI 0·54-0·98]; n=112 in the atezolizumab group and n=110 in the docetaxel group) or non-squamous (0·73 [0·60-0·89]; n=313 and n=315) histology. Fewer patients had treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events with atezolizumab (90 [15%] of 609 patients) versus docetaxel (247 [43%] of 578 patients). One treatment-related death from a respiratory tract infection was reported in the docetaxel group. INTERPRETATION: To our knowledge, OAK is the first randomised phase 3 study to report results of a PD-L1-targeted therapy, with atezolizumab treatment resulting in a clinically relevant improvement of overall survival versus docetaxel in previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer, regardless of PD-L1 expression or histology, with a favourable safety profile. FUNDING: F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Genentech, Inc.

A randomized Phase II trial of the tumor vascular disrupting agent CA4P (fosbretabulin tromethamine) with carboplatin, paclitaxel, and bevacizumab in advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Combretastatin A4-phosphate, fosbretabulin tromethamine (CA4P) is a vascular disrupting agent that targets tumor vasculature. This study evaluated the safety of CA4P when combined with carboplatin, paclitaxel, and bevacizumab in chemotherapy-naïve subjects with advanced nonsquamous, non-small-cell lung cancer. METHODS: Adult subjects with confirmed American Joint Committee on Cancer six stage IIIB/IV non-small-cell lung cancer and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score of 0 or 1 were randomized to receive six cycles (treatment phase) of paclitaxel (200 mg/m2), carboplatin (area under the concentration versus time curve 6), and bevacizumab (15 mg/kg) on day 1 and repeated every 21 days, or this regimen plus CA4P (60 mg/m2) on days 7, 14, and 21 of each cycle. Subjects could then receive additional maintenance treatment (excluding carboplatin and paclitaxel) for up to 1 year. RESULTS: Sixty-three subjects were randomized, 31 to control and 32 to CA4P, and 19 (61.3%) and 17 (53.1%), respectively, completed the treatment phase. Exposure to study treatment and dose modifications were comparable between the randomized groups. The overall incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was similar between groups, with increased neutropenia, leukopenia, and hypertension in the CA4P group. Deaths, serious adverse events, and early discontinuations from treatment were comparable between the randomized treatment groups. The overall tumor response rate with CA4P was 50% versus 32% in controls. Overall and progression-free survival rates were comparable between the groups. CONCLUSION: CA4P plus carboplatin, paclitaxel, and bevacizumab appears to be a tolerable regimen with an acceptable toxicity profile in subjects with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

Randomized phase 1 crossover study assessing the bioequivalence of capsule and tablet formulations of dovitinib (TKI258) in patients with advanced solid tumors.

PURPOSE: A capsule formulation of the tyrosine kinase inhibitor dovitinib (TKI258) was recently studied in a phase 3 renal cell carcinoma trial; however, tablets are the planned commercial formulation. Therefore, this randomized 2-way crossover study evaluated the bioequivalence of dovitinib tablet and capsule formulations in pretreated patients with advanced solid tumors, excluding breast cancer. METHODS: In this 2-part study, eligible patients received dovitinib 500 mg once daily on a 5-days-on/2-days-off schedule. During the 2-period bioequivalence phase, patients received their initial formulation (capsule or tablet) for 3 weeks before being switched to the alternative formulation in the second period. Patients could continue to receive dovitinib capsules on the same dosing schedule during the post-bioequivalence phase. RESULTS: A total of 173 patients were enrolled into the bioequivalence phase of the study (capsule â†’ tablet, n = 88; tablet â†’ capsule, n = 85), and 69 patients had evaluable pharmacokinetics (PK) for both periods. PK analyses showed similar exposure and PK profiles for the dovitinib capsule and tablet formulations and supported bioequivalence [geometric mean ratios: AUClast, 0.95 (90 % CI 0.88-1.01); C max, 0.98 (90 % CI 0.91-1.05)]. The most common adverse events, suspected to be study drug related, included diarrhea (60 %), nausea (53 %), fatigue (45 %), and vomiting (43 %). Of 168 patients evaluable for response, 1 achieved a partial response, and stable disease was observed in 32 % of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Dovitinib capsules and tablets were bioequivalent, with a safety profile similar to that observed in other dovitinib studies of patients with heavily pretreated advanced solid tumors.

Double-Blind Phase III Randomized Trial of the Antiprogestin Agent Mifepristone in the Treatment of Unresectable Meningioma: SWOG S9005.

PURPOSE: Progesterone receptors are expressed in approximately 70% of meningiomas. Mifepristone is an oral antiprogestational agent reported to have modest activity in a phase II study. This multicenter, prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled phase III trial conducted by SWOG was planned to define the role of mifepristone in the treatment of unresectable meningioma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive either mifepristone or placebo for 2 years unless disease progressed. Patients who were stable or responding to protocol therapy after 2 years had the option to continue with the same blinded therapy. Serial follow-up allowed assessment of efficacy and toxicity. Time to treatment failure and overall survival were ascertained for all randomly assigned patients. On progression, patients receiving placebo could cross over and receive active drug. RESULTS: Among 164 eligible patients, 80 were randomly assigned to mifepristone and 84 to placebo. Twenty-four patients (30%) were able to complete 2 years of mifepristone without disease progression, adverse effects, or other reasons for discontinuation. Twenty-eight patients (33%) in the placebo arm completed the 2-year study. There was no statistical difference between the arms in terms of failure-free or overall survival. CONCLUSION: Long-term administration of mifepristone was well tolerated but had no impact on patients with unresectable meningioma.

Metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma: A review of current therapies and novel immunotherapies.

Treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has changed dramatically in the past 10 years, largely due to advances in understanding of tumor biology. A number of targeted therapies have been shown to improve progression free survival and overall survival as compared to nonspecific immunotherapy. Despite the success of targeted therapies, they have not produced durable responses that have been seen historically with immunotherapy such as IL-2 (interleukin 2) and IFN-α (interferon). The promise of durable responses has caused some to shift research focus from targeted therapies to novel immunotherapies. This article reviews the literature behind the current targeted therapies and describes several novel approaches to immunotherapy that are in various phases of development.