Results of a Dose-Finding Phase 1b Study of Subcutaneous Atezolizumab in Patients With Locally Advanced or Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

Intravenous (IV) atezolizumab is approved for non-small cell lung and other cancers. Subcutaneous (SC) atezolizumab coformulated with recombinant human hyaluronidase, a permeation enhancer for SC dispersion and absorption, is being developed to improve treatment options, reduce burden, and increase efficiency for patients and practitioners. IMscin001 (NCT03735121), a 2-part, open-label, global, multicenter, phase 1b/3 study, is evaluating the pharmacokinetics (PK), safety, and efficacy of SC atezolizumab. The part 1 (phase 1b) objective was determination of an SC atezolizumab dose yielding a serum trough concentration (Ctrough ) comparable with IV. Patients enrolled in 3 cohorts received SC atezolizumab 1800 mg (thigh) once (cohort 1), 1200 mg (thigh) every 2 weeks for 3 cycles (cohort 2), or 1800 mg (abdomen) every 3 weeks cycle 1, then cycles 2 and 3 (thigh) every 3 weeks (cohort 3). In subsequent cycles, IV atezolizumab 1200 mg every 3 weeks was administered until loss of clinical benefit. SC atezolizumab 1800 mg every 3 weeks and 1200 mg every 2 weeks provided similar Ctrough and area under the curve values in cycle 1 to the corresponding IV atezolizumab reference, was well tolerated, and exhibited a safety profile consistent with the established IV formulation. Exposure following SC injection in the abdomen was lower (20%, 28%, and 27% for Ctrough , maximum concentration, and area under the concentration-time curve from time 0 to day 21, respectively) than in the thigh. Part 1 SC and IV PK data were analyzed using a population PK modeling approach, followed by simulations. Part 2 (phase 3) will now be initiated to demonstrate that SC atezolizumab PK exposure is not lower than that of IV.

Outcomes According to ALK Status Determined by Central Immunohistochemistry or Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization in Patients With ALK-Positive NSCLC Enrolled in the Phase 3 ALEX Study.

INTRODUCTION: We retrospectively examined progression-free survival (PFS) and response by ALK fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) status in patients with advanced ALK immunohistochemistry (IHC)-positive NSCLC in the ALEX study. METHODS: A total of 303 treatment-naive patients were randomized to receive twice-daily alectinib 600 mg or crizotinib 250 mg. ALK status was assessed centrally using Ventana ALK (D5F3) CDx IHC and Vysis ALK Break Apart FISH Probe Kit. Primary end point is investigator-assessed PFS. Secondary end points of interest are objective response rate and duration. RESULTS: Investigator-assessed PFS was significantly prolonged with alectinib versus crizotinib in ALK IHC-positive and FISH-positive tumors (n = 203, 67%) (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.37, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.25-0.56; p < 0.0001) and ALK IHC-positive and FISH-uninformative tumors (n = 61, 20%) (HR = 0.39, 95% CI: 0.20-0.78) but not in ALK IHC-positive and FISH-negative tumors (n = 39, 13%) (HR = 1.33, 95% CI: 0.6-3.2). Objective response rates were higher with alectinib versus crizotinib in ALK IHC-positive and FISH-positive tumors (90.6% versus 81.4%; stratified OR = 2.22, 95% CI: 0.97-5.07) and ALK IHC-positive and FISH-uninformative tumors (96.0% versus 75.0%; OR = 9.29, 95% CI: 1.05-81.88) but not in ALK IHC-positive and FISH-negative tumors (28.6% versus 44.4%; OR = 0.45, 95% CI: 0.12-1.74). Next-generation sequencing was performed in 35 of 39 patients with ALK IHC-positive and FISH-negative tumors; no ALK fusion was identified in 20 of 35 patients (57.1%) by next-generation sequencing, but 10 of 20 (50.0%) had partial response or stable disease. CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes of patients with ALK IHC-positive and FISH-positive and ALK IHC-positive and FISH-uninformative NSCLC were similar to those of the overall ALEX population. These results suggest that Ventana ALK IHC is a standard testing method for selecting patients for treatment with alectinib.

Outcomes According to ALK Status Determined by Central IHC or FISH in Patients with ALK-Positive NSCLC Enrolled in the Phase III ALEX Study.

INTRODUCTION: We retrospectively examined progression-free survival (PFS) and response by ALK fluorescence in-situ hybridization (FISH) status in patients with advanced ALK immunohistochemistry (IHC)-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in the ALEX study. METHODS: 303 treatment-naïve patients were randomized to receive twice-daily alectinib 600 mg or crizotinib 250 mg. ALK status was assessed centrally using Ventana ALK (D5F3) CDx IHC and Vysis ALK Break Apart FISH Probe Kit. Primary endpoint: investigator-assessed PFS. Secondary endpoints of interest: objective response rate (ORR) and duration. RESULTS: Investigator-assessed PFS was significantly prolonged with alectinib versus crizotinib in ALK IHC-positive/FISH-positive tumors (n = 203, 67%) (HR 0.37, 95% CI: 0.25-0.56) and ALK IHC-positive/FISH-uninformative tumors (n = 61, 20%) (HR 0.39, 95% CI: 0.20-0.78), but not ALK IHC-positive/FISH-negative tumors (n = 39, 13%) (HR 1.33, 95% CI: 0.6-3.2). ORRs were higher with alectinib versus crizotinib in ALK IHC-positive/FISH-positive tumors 90.6% versus 81.4%; stratified odds ratio [OR] 2.22, 95% CI: 0.97-5.07) and ALK IHC-positive/FISH-uninformative tumors (96.0% versus 75.0%; OR 9.29, 95% CI: 1.05-81.88), but not ALK IHC-positive/FISH-negative tumors (28.6% versus 44.4%; OR 0.45, 95% CI: 0.12-1.74). Next-generation sequencing (NGS) was performed in 35/39 patients with ALK IHC-positive/FISH-negative tumors; no ALK fusion was identified in 20/35 (57.1%) patients by NGS, but 10/20 (50.0%) had partial response/stable disease. CONCLUSION: Outcomes of patients with ALK IHC-positive/FISH-positive and ALK IHC-positive/FISH-uninformative NSCLC were similar to the overall ALEX population. These results suggest that Ventana ALK IHC is a standard testing method for selecting patients for treatment with alectinib.

Bevacizumab, temozolomide, and radiotherapy for newly diagnosed glioblastoma: comprehensive safety results during and after first-line therapy.

BACKGROUND: The proposed use of bevacizumab with radiotherapy/temozolomide for newly diagnosed glioblastoma raised potential safety concerns. Bevacizumab has been linked with stroke, bleeding events, and wound-healing complications in other tumor types; these events are of particular concern for glioblastoma (highly vascular tumors that are usually resected). Published data on the interaction of bevacizumab with radiotherapy/temozolomide are also limited. We report safety data from a phase III randomized trial (Avastin in Glioblastoma), focusing on these considerations. METHODS: Eligible patients received: radiotherapy and temozolomide plus bevacizumab/placebo, 6 cycles; a 4-week treatment break; temozolomide plus bevacizumab/placebo, 6 cycles; and bevacizumab/placebo until progression. Data on adverse events (AEs) were collected throughout. RESULTS: Bevacizumab-treated patients (n = 461) had a longer median safety follow-up time (12.3 vs 8.5 mo), and a higher proportion completed 6 cycles of maintenance temozolomide (64.6% vs 36.9%) versus placebo (n = 450). The incidences of relevant AEs (bevacizumab vs placebo, respectively) were: arterial thromboembolic events (5.9% vs 1.6%); cerebral hemorrhage (3.3% vs 2.0%); wound-healing complications (6.9% vs 4.7%); thrombocytopenia (34.1% vs 27.3%); radiotherapy-associated skin injury (8.2% vs 9.3%); alopecia (39.0% vs 36.0%); gastrointestinal perforation (including gastrointestinal abscesses and fistulae, 1.7% vs 0.4%); and radiotherapy-associated injury (0.4% vs 0.0%). Overall, 15.8% and 23.8% of bevacizumab- and placebo-treated patients had surgery (including biopsy) after progression. Within 30 days of postprogression surgery, AE incidence was 10.9% (bevacizumab) and 23.4% (placebo). CONCLUSION: The safety profile was consistent with that expected from radiotherapy/temozolomide plus bevacizumab. The increased AE incidence with bevacizumab did not impact patients' ability to receive standard-of-care treatment or to undergo further surgery.

Improving outcomes of acute invasive Aspergillus rhinosinusitis in patients with hematologic malignancies or aplastic anemia: the role of voriconazole.

We evaluated the outcomes of patients with hematologic diseases diagnosed with acute invasive Aspergillus rhinosinusitis comparing a group of patients diagnosed after voriconazole was available at our center with a historical group of patients diagnosed before voriconazole was available. Voriconazole use was associated with a decrease in mortality and earlier clinical response.

Does antibiotic exposure increase the risk of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) isolation? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Current evidence does not provide a clear definition of the association between methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) isolation and previous antibiotic use. A systematic review was performed to determine whether antibiotic exposure is a risk factor for the isolation of MRSA. METHODS: MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched to identify studies published between 1976 and 2007 on the role of antibiotics as a risk factor for MRSA isolation in adult patients. The outcome of interest was MRSA isolation. Summary statistics were risk ratios (RR) comparing MRSA-positive patients to those without S. aureus isolation or with methicillin-susceptible S. aureus isolation. RESULTS: Seventy-six studies, including a total of 24 230 patients, met the inclusion criteria. Antibiotic exposure was determined in the 126 +/- 184 (mean +/- SD) days preceding MRSA isolation. The risk of acquiring MRSA was increased by 1.8-fold [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.7-1.9; P < 0.001] in patients who had taken antibiotics. The RR for single classes of antibiotics was 3 (95% CI, 2.5-3.5) for quinolones, 2.9 (95% CI, 2.4-3.5) for glycopeptides, 2.2 (95% CI, 1.7-2.9) for cephalosporins and 1.9 (95% CI, 1.7-2.2) for other beta-lactams. Significant heterogeneity was detected among studies. A regression analysis revealed that the heterogeneity was linked to the length of time in which antibiotic exposure was detected before MRSA isolation (more or less than 180 days). CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis shows a clear association between exposure to antibiotics and MRSA isolation. This information may be useful for researchers in designing future studies and for policy decision-making on the appropriate management of antibiotic therapies.