Adjuvant Gemcitabine Versus Neoadjuvant/Adjuvant FOLFIRINOX in Resectable Pancreatic Cancer: The Randomized Multicenter Phase II NEPAFOX Trial.

BACKGROUND: Although addition of adjuvant chemotherapy is the current standard, the prognosis of pancreatic cancers still remains poor. The NEPAFOX trial evaluated perioperative treatment with FOLFIRINOX in resectable pancreatic cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This multicenter phase II trial randomized patients with resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer without metastases into arm (A,) upfront surgery plus adjuvant gemcitabine, or arm (B,) perioperative FOLFIRINOX. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Owing to poor accrual, recruitment was prematurely stopped after randomization of 40 of the planned 126 patients (A: 21, B: 19). Overall, approximately three-quarters were classified as primarily resectable (A: 16, B: 15), and the remaining patients were classified as borderline resectable (A: 5, B: 4). Of the 12 evaluable patients, 3 achieved partial response under neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX. Of the 21 patients in arm A and 19 patients in arm B, 17 and 7 underwent curative surgery, and R0-resection was achieved in 77% and 71%, respectively. Perioperative morbidity occurred in 72% in arm A and 46% in arm B, whereas non-surgical toxicity was comparable in both arms. Median RFS/PFS was almost doubled in arm B (14.1 months) compared with arm A (8.4 months) in the population with surgical resection, whereas median OS was comparable between both arms. CONCLUSIONS: Although the analysis was only descriptive owing to small patient numbers, no safety issues regarding surgical complications were observed in the perioperative FOLFIRINOX arm. Thus, considering the small number of patients, perioperative treatment approach appears feasible and potentially effective in well-selected cohorts of patients. In pancreatic cancer, patient selection before initiation of neoadjuvant therapy appears to be critical.

Rationale and design of the 2 by 2 factorial design GnG-trial: a randomized phase-III study to compare two schedules of gemtuzumab ozogamicin as adjunct to intensive induction therapy and to compare double-blinded intensive postremission therapy with or without glasdegib in older patients with newly diagnosed AML.

BACKGROUND: Overall survival remains poor in older patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) with less than 10% being alive after 5 years. In recent studies, a significant improvement in event-free, relapse-free and overall survival was shown by adding gemtuzumab ozogamicin (GO), a humanized antibody-drug conjugate directed against CD33, to intensive induction therapy once or in a sequential dosing schedule. Glasdegib, the small-molecule inhibitor of smoothened (SMO), also showed improved overall survival in patients not eligible for intensive chemotherapy when combined with low-dose cytarabine compared to low-dose cytarabine alone. These findings warrant further investigations in the phase III GnG trial. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a randomized phase III trial with measurable residual disease (MRD) after induction therapy and event-free survival (EFS) as primary endpoints. The two research questions are addressed in a 2 by 2 factorial design. Patients age 60 years and older are upfront randomized 1:1 in one of the two induction arms: GO administered to intensive induction therapy on days 1,4, and 7 versus GO administered once on day 1 (GO-147 versus GO-1), and double-blinded 1:1 in one of the subsequent treatment arms glasdegib vs. placebo as adjunct to consolidation therapy and as single-agent maintenance therapy for six months. Chemotherapy backbone for induction therapy consists of standard 7 + 3 schedule with cytarabine 200 mg/m2 continuously days 1 to 7, daunorubicin 60 mg/m2 days 1, 2, and 3 and high-dose cytarabine (1 g/m2, bi-daily, days 1, 2, and 3) for consolidation therapy. Addressing two primary endpoints, MRD-negativity after induction therapy and event-free survival (EFS), 252 evaluable patients are needed to reject each of the two null hypotheses at a two-sided significance level of 2.5% with a power of at least 85%. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval and approvals from the local and federal competent authorities were granted. Trial results will be reported via peer-reviewed journals and presented at conferences and scientific meetings. TRIAL STATUS: Protocol version: 1st version 20.10.2020, no amendments yet. Study initiation on February 16, 2021. First patient was recruited on April 1st. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04093505 ; EudraCT 2019-003913-32. Registered on October 30, 2018.

Quality of life and outcome of patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer receiving first-line chemotherapy with nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine: Real-life results from the prospective QOLIXANE trial of the Platform for Outcome, Quality of Life and Translational Research on Pancreatic Cancer registry.

Few data exist on health-related quality of life (QoL) in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPC) receiving first-line chemotherapy (Awad L ZE, Mesbah M Boston, MA. Applying survival data methodology to analyze quality of life data, in Mesbah M, Cole BF, Ting Lee M-L (eds): Statistical Methods for Quality of Life Studies: Design, Measurements and Analysis. Kluwer Academic Publishers 2002). The QOLIXANE study is a prospective, noninterventional, multicenter substudy of the Platform for Outcome, Quality of Life and Translational Research on Pancreatic Cancer (PARAGON) registry, which evaluated QoL in patients with mPC receiving first-line gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel chemotherapy in real-life setting. QoL was prospectively measured via EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaires at baseline and every month thereafter. Therapy and efficacy parameters were prospectively collected. Main objectives were the rate of patients without deterioration of Global Health Status/QoL (GHS/QoL) at 3 and 6 months. Six hundred patients were enrolled in 95 German study sites. Median progression-free survival was 5.9 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.2-6.3). Median overall survival (OS) was 8.9 months (95% CI, 7.9-10.2), while median time to deterioration of GHS/QoL was 4.7 months (95% CI, 4.0-5.6). With a baseline GHS/QoL score of 46 (SD, 22.8), baseline QoL of the patients was severely impaired, in most cases due to loss in role functioning and fatigue. In the Kaplan-Meier analysis, 61% and 41% of patients had maintained GHS/QoL after 3 and 6 months, respectively. However, in the QoL response analysis, 35% and 19% of patients had maintained (improved or stable) GHS/QoL after 3 and 6 months, respectively, while 14% and 9% had deteriorated GHS/QoL with the remaining patients being nonevaluable. In the Cox regression analysis, GHS/QoL scores strongly predicted survival with a hazard ratio of 0.86 (P < .0001). Patients with mPC have poor QoL at baseline that deteriorates within a median of 4.7 months. Treatment with gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel is associated with maintained QoL in relevant proportions of patients. However, overall, results remain poor, reflecting the aggressive nature of the disease.

Sorafenib and everolimus in patients with advanced solid tumors and KRAS-mutated NSCLC: A phase I trial with early pharmacodynamic FDG-PET assessment.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of patients with solid tumors and KRAS mutations remains disappointing. One option is the combined inhibition of pathways involved in RAF-MEK-ERK and PI3K-AKT-mTOR. METHODS: Patients with relapsed solid tumors were treated with escalating doses of everolimus (E) 2.5-10.0 mg/d in a 14-day run-in phase followed by combination therapy with sorafenib (S) 800 mg/d from day 15. KRAS mutational status was assessed retrospectively in the escalation phase. Extension phase included KRAS-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) only. Pharmacokinetic analyses were accompanied by pharmacodynamics assessment of E by FDG-PET. Efficacy was assessed by CT scans every 6 weeks of combination. RESULTS: Of 31 evaluable patients, 15 had KRAS mutation, 4 patients were negative for KRAS mutation, and the KRAS status remained unknown in 12 patients. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was not reached. The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was defined as 7.5 mg/d E + 800 mg/d S due to toxicities at previous dose level (10 mg/d E + 800 mg/d S) including leucopenia/thrombopenia III° and pneumonia III° occurring after the DLT interval. The metabolic response rate in FDG-PET was 17% on day 5 and 20% on day 14. No patient reached partial response in CT scan. Median progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 3.25 and 5.85 months, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of patients with relapsed solid tumors with 7.5 mg/d E and 800 mg/d S is safe and feasible. Early metabolic response in FDG-PET was not confirmed in CT scan several weeks later. The combination of S and E is obviously not sufficient to induce durable responses in patients with KRAS-mutant solid tumors.

Baseline and interim PET-based outcome prediction in peripheral T-cell lymphoma: A subgroup analysis of the PETAL trial.

The prospective randomized Positron Emission Tomography (PET)-Guided Therapy of Aggressive Non-Hodgkin Lymphomas (PETAL) trial was designed to test the ability of interim PET (iPET) to direct therapy. As reported previously, outcome remained unaffected by iPET-based treatment changes. In this subgroup analysis, we studied the prognostic value of baseline total metabolic tumor volume (TMTV) and iPET response in 76 patients with T-cell lymphoma. TMTV was measured using the 41% maximum standardized uptake value (SUV41max ) and SUV4 thresholding methods. Interim PET was performed after two treatment cycles and evaluated using the ΔSUVmax approach and the Deauville scale. Because of significant differences in outcome, patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive lymphoma were analyzed separately from patients with ALK-negative lymphoma. In the latter, TMTV was statistically significantly correlated with progression-free survival, with thresholds best dichotomizing the population, of 232 cm3 using SUV41max and 460 cm3 using SUV4 . For iPET response, the respective thresholds were 46.9% SUVmax reduction and Deauville score 1-4 vs 5. The proportion of poor prognosis patients was 46% and 29% for TMTV by SUV41max and SUV4 , and 29% and 25% for iPET response by ΔSUVmax and Deauville, respectively. At diagnosis, the hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) for poor prognosis vs good prognosis patients according to TMTV was 2.291 (1.135-4.624) for SUV41max and 3.206 (1.524-6.743) for SUV4 . At iPET, it was 3.910 (1.891-8.087) for ΔSUVmax and 4.371 (2.079-9.187) for Deauville. On multivariable analysis, only TMTV and iPET response independently predicted survival. Patients with high baseline TMTV and poor iPET response (22% of the population) invariably progressed or died within the first year (hazard ratio, 9.031 [3.651-22.336]). Due to small numbers and events, PET did not predict survival in ALK-positive lymphoma. Baseline TMTV and iPET response are promising tools to select patients with ALK-negative T-cell lymphoma for early allogeneic transplantation or innovative therapies.

Perioperative chemotherapy with fluorouracil plus leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and docetaxel versus fluorouracil or capecitabine plus cisplatin and epirubicin for locally advanced, resectable gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (FLOT4): a randomised, phase 2/3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Docetaxel-based chemotherapy is effective in metastatic gastric and gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma. This study reports on the safety and efficacy of the docetaxel-based triplet FLOT (fluorouracil plus leucovorin, oxaliplatin and docetaxel) as a perioperative therapy for patients with locally advanced, resectable tumours. METHODS: In this controlled, open-label, phase 2/3 trial, we randomly assigned 716 patients with histologically-confirmed advanced clinical stage cT2 or higher or nodal positive stage (cN+), or both, resectable tumours, with no evidence of distant metastases, via central interactive web-based-response system, to receive either three pre-operative and three postoperative 3-week cycles of 50 mg/m2 epirubicin and 60 mg/m2 cisplatin on day 1 plus either 200 mg/m2 fluorouracil as continuous intravenous infusion or 1250 mg/m2 capecitabine orally on days 1 to 21 (ECF/ECX; control group) or four preoperative and four postoperative 2-week cycles of 50 mg/m2 docetaxel, 85 mg/m2 oxaliplatin, 200 mg/m2 leucovorin and 2600 mg/m2 fluorouracil as 24-h infusion on day 1 (FLOT; experimental group). The primary outcome of the trial was overall survival (superiority) analysed in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01216644. FINDINGS: Between Aug 8, 2010, and Feb 10, 2015, 716 patients were randomly assigned to treatment in 38 German hospitals or with practice-based oncologists. 360 patients were assigned to ECF/ECX and 356 patients to FLOT. Overall survival was increased in the FLOT group compared with the ECF/ECX group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·77; 95% confidence interval [CI; 0.63 to 0·94]; median overall survival, 50 months [38·33 to not reached] vs 35 months [27·35 to 46·26]). The number of patients with related serious adverse events (including those occurring during hospital stay for surgery) was similar in the two groups (96 [27%] in the ECF/ECX group vs 97 [27%] in the FLOT group), as was the number of toxic deaths (two [<1%] in both groups). Hospitalisation for toxicity occurred in 94 patients (26%) in the ECF/ECX group and 89 patients (25%) in the FLOT group. INTERPRETATION: In locally advanced, resectable gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma, perioperative FLOT improved overall survival compared with perioperative ECF/ECX. FUNDING: The German Cancer Aid (Deutsche Krebshilfe), Sanofi-Aventis, Chugai, and Stiftung Leben mit Krebs Foundation.

Six versus eight doses of rituximab in patients with aggressive B cell lymphoma receiving six cycles of CHOP: results from the "Positron Emission Tomography-Guided Therapy of Aggressive Non-Hodgkin Lymphomas" (PETAL) trial.

Standard first-line treatment of aggressive B cell lymphoma comprises six or eight cycles of cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP) plus eight doses of rituximab (R). Whether adding two doses of rituximab to six cycles of R-CHOP is of therapeutic benefit has not been systematically investigated. The Positron Emission Tomography-Guided Therapy of Aggressive Non-Hodgkin Lymphomas (PETAL) trial investigated the ability of [18F]-fluorodesoxyglucose PET scanning to guide treatment in aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphomas. Patients with B cell lymphomas and a negative interim scan received six cycles of R-CHOP with or without two extra doses of rituximab. For reasons related to trial design, only about a third underwent randomization between the two options. Combining randomized and non-randomized patients enabled subgroup analyses for diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL; n = 544), primary mediastinal B cell lymphoma (PMBCL; n = 37), and follicular lymphoma (FL) grade 3 (n = 35). With a median follow-up of 52 months, increasing the number of rituximab administrations failed to improve outcome. A non-significant trend for improved event-free survival was seen in DLBCL high-risk patients, as defined by the International Prognostic Index, while inferior survival was observed in female patients below the age of 60 years. Long-term outcome in PMBCL was excellent. Differences between FL grade 3a and FL grade 3b were not apparent. The results were confirmed in a Cox proportional hazard regression model and a propensity score matching analysis. In conclusion, adding two doses of rituximab to six cycles of R-CHOP did not improve outcome in patients with aggressive B cell lymphomas and a fast metabolic treatment response.

Sequential high-dose cytarabine and mitoxantrone (S-HAM) versus standard double induction in acute myeloid leukemia-a phase 3 study.

Dose-dense induction with the S-HAM regimen was compared to standard double induction therapy in adult patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia. Patients were centrally randomized (1:1) between S-HAM (2nd chemotherapy cycle starting on day 8 = "dose-dense") and double induction with TAD-HAM or HAM(-HAM) (2nd cycle starting on day 21 = "standard"). 387 evaluable patients were randomly assigned to S-HAM (N = 203) and to standard double induction (N = 184). The primary endpoint overall response rate (ORR) consisting of complete remission (CR) and incomplete remission (CRi) was not significantly different (P = 0.202) between S-HAM (77%) and double induction (72%). The median overall survival was 35 months after S-HAM and 25 months after double induction (P = 0.323). Duration of critical leukopenia was significantly reduced after S-HAM (median 29 days) versus double induction (median 44 days)-P < 0.001. This translated into a significantly shortened duration of hospitalization after S-HAM (median 37 days) as compared to standard induction (median 49 days)-P < 0.001. In conclusion, dose-dense induction therapy with the S-HAM regimen shows favorable trends but no significant differences in ORR and OS compared to standard double induction. S-HAM significantly shortens critical leukopenia and the duration of hospitalization by 2 weeks.

Randomised phase II trial to investigate catumaxomab (anti-EpCAM × anti-CD3) for treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis in patients with gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: Peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) represents an unfavourable prognostic factor for patients with gastric cancer (GC). Intraperitoneal treatment with the bispecific and trifunctional antibody catumaxomab (EpCAM, CD3), in addition to systemic chemotherapy, could improve elimination of PC. METHODS: This prospective, randomised, phase II study investigated the efficacy of catumaxomab followed by chemotherapy (arm A, 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, docetaxel, FLOT) or FLOT alone (arm B) in patients with GC and PC. Primary endpoint was the rate of macroscopic complete remission (mCR) of PC at the time of second diagnostic laparoscopy/laparotomy prior to optional surgery. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 52 months. Out of 35 patients screened, 15 were allocated to arm A and 16 to arm B. mCR rate was 27% in arm A and 19% in arm B (p = 0.69). Severe side effects associated with catumaxomab were nausea, infection, abdominal pain, and elevated liver enzymes. Median progression-free (6.7 vs. 5.4 months, p = 0.71) and overall survival (13.2 vs. 13.0 months, p = 0.97) were not significantly different in both treatment arms. CONCLUSIONS: Addition of catumaxomab to systemic chemotherapy was feasible and tolerable in advanced GC. Although the primary endpoint could not be demonstrated, results are promising for future investigations integrating intraperitoneal immunotherapy into a multimodal treatment strategy.

Positron Emission Tomography-Guided Therapy of Aggressive Non-Hodgkin Lymphomas (PETAL): A Multicenter, Randomized Phase III Trial.

Purpose Interim positron emission tomography (PET) using the tracer, [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose, may predict outcomes in patients with aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphomas. We assessed whether PET can guide therapy in patients who are treated with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP). Patients and Methods Newly diagnosed patients received two cycles of CHOP-plus rituximab (R-CHOP) in CD20-positive lymphomas-followed by a PET scan that was evaluated using the ΔSUVmax method. PET-positive patients were randomly assigned to receive six additional cycles of R-CHOP or six blocks of an intensive Burkitt's lymphoma protocol. PET-negative patients with CD20-positive lymphomas were randomly assigned or allocated to receive four additional cycles of R-CHOP or the same treatment with two additional doses rituximab. The primary end point was event-free survival time as assessed by log-rank test. Results Interim PET was positive in 108 (12.5%) and negative in 754 (87.5%) of 862 patients treated, with statistically significant differences in event-free survival and overall survival. Among PET-positive patients, 52 were randomly assigned to R-CHOP and 56 to the Burkitt protocol, with 2-year event-free survival rates of 42.0% (95% CI, 28.2% to 55.2%) and 31.6% (95% CI, 19.3% to 44.6%), respectively (hazard ratio, 1.501 [95% CI, 0.896 to 2.514]; P = .1229). The Burkitt protocol produced significantly more toxicity. Of 754 PET-negative patients, 255 underwent random assignment (129 to R-CHOP and 126 to R-CHOP with additional rituximab). Event-free survival rates were 76.4% (95% CI, 68.0% to 82.8%) and 73.5% (95% CI, 64.8% to 80.4%), respectively (hazard ratio, 1.048 [95% CI, 0.684 to 1.606]; P = .8305). Outcome prediction by PET was independent of the International Prognostic Index. Results in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma were similar to those in the total group. Conclusion Interim PET predicted survival in patients with aggressive lymphomas treated with R-CHOP. PET-based treatment intensification did not improve outcome.

Histopathological regression after neoadjuvant docetaxel, oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin versus epirubicin, cisplatin, and fluorouracil or capecitabine in patients with resectable gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (FLOT4-AIO): results from the phase 2 part of a multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 2/3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Docetaxel-based chemotherapy is effective in metastatic gastric and gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma, but has not yet been evaluated in the context of resectable patients. Here we report findings from the phase 2 part of the phase 2/3 FLOT4 trial, which compared histopathological regression in patients treated with a docetaxel-based triplet chemotherapy versus an anthracycline-based triplet chemotherapy before surgical resection. METHODS: In this randomised, open-label, phase 2/3 study, eligible participants were recruited from 28 German oncology centres. Patients with resectable gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction cancer who had clinical stage cT2 or higher, nodal positive (cN+) disease, or both were randomly assigned (1:1) to either three preoperative and three postoperative 3-week cycles of intravenous epirubicin 50 mg/m2 on day 1, intravenous cisplatin 60 mg/m2 on day 1, and either fluorouracil 200 mg/m2 as continuous intravenous infusion or capecitabine 1250 mg/m2 orally (two doses of 625 mg/m2 per day) on days 1 to 21 (ECF/ECX group) or four preoperative and four postoperative 2-week cycles of docetaxel 50 mg/m2, intravenous oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, intravenous leucovorin 200 mg/m2, and fluorouracil 2600 mg/m2 as a 24 h infusion, all on day 1 (FLOT group). Randomisation was done centrally with an interactive web-response system based on a sequence generated with blocks (block size 2) stratified by Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, location of primary tumour, age, and nodal status. No masking was done. Central assessment of pathological regression was done according to the Becker criteria. The primary endpoint was pathological complete regression (tumour regression grade TRG1a) and was analysed in the modified intention-to-treat population, defined as all patients who were randomly assigned to treatment excluding patients who had surgery but did not provide resection specimens for central evaluation. The study (including the phase 3 part) has completed enrolment, but follow-up is ongoing and this is an interim analysis. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01216644. FINDINGS: Between Aug 18, 2010, and Aug 10, 2012, 300 patients (152 patients in the ECF/ECX group; 148 patients in the FLOT group) were enrolled into the phase 2 part of the study, 265 of whom (137 in the ECF/ECX group; 128 in the FLOT group) were assessable on a modified intention-to-treat basis. 119 (93%) of 128 patients in the FLOT group and 126 (92%) of 137 patients in the ECF/ECX group were given all planned preoperative cycles of treatment. FLOT was associated with significantly higher proportions of patients achieving pathological complete regression than was ECF/ECX (20 [16%; 95% CI 10-23] of 128 patients vs eight [6%; 3-11] of 137 patients; p=0·02). 44 (40%) of 111 patients in the ECF/ECX group and 30 (25%) of 119 patients in the FLOT group had at least one serious adverse event involving a perioperative medical or surgical complication. The most common non-surgical grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (52 [38%] of 137 patients in the ECF/ECX group vs 67 [52%] of 128 patients in the FLOT group), leucopenia (28 [20%] vs 36 [28%]), nausea (23 [17%] vs 12 [9%]), infection (16 [12%] vs 15 [12%]), fatigue (19 [14%] vs 11 [9%]), and vomiting (13 [10%] vs four [3%]). INTERPRETATION: Perioperative FLOT was active and feasible to administer, and might represent an option for patients with locally advanced, resectable gastric or gastro-eosophageal junction adenocarcinoma. FUNDING: None.

CHAMP: A Phase II Study of Panitumumab With Pemetrexed and Cisplatin Versus Pemetrexed and Cisplatin in the Treatment of Patients With Advanced-Stage Primary Nonsquamous Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer With Particular Regard to the KRAS Status.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of the study was to investigate the efficacy and tolerability of panitumumab, a fully human antiepidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibody, in combination with pemetrexed/cisplatin in patients with stage IIIB to IV primary nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer and wild type V-Ki-ras2 Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog (KRAS). Results were compared with those obtained in a control group of patients who received a pemetrexed/cisplatin regimen only. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a phase II, randomized, open-label study with 2 treatment arms. In total, 96 patients received panitumumab at a dose of 9 mg/kg in combination with pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2) and cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) (n = 49) or pemetrexed/cisplatin alone (n = 47). The primary outcome measure was progression-free survival at 6 months. Secondary end points of the study included overall survival, tumor response, quality of life, and safety outcomes. The CHAMP study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01088620. RESULTS: Progression-free survival at 6 months did not indicate a benefit of panitumumab as a supplement to the standard therapy of pemetrexed/cisplatin whereas the overall survival showed a clear difference between the treatment groups in favor of the standard therapy. Results might be affected by the higher rates of serious adverse events and higher death rates within the panitumumab arm. CONCLUSIONS: Results from the present study indicate that combination of cisplatin/pemetrexed with panitumumab should not be recommended for patients with adenocarcinoma and KRAS wild type because of lack of efficacy, lack of improvement of quality of life, and because of the increase in toxicity rates compared with patients in the control arm, who received standard chemotherapy of pemetrexed/cisplatin.

A randomised phase II study of pemetrexed versus pemetrexed+erlotinib as second-line treatment for locally advanced or metastatic non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Pemetrexed and erlotinib have been approved as second-line monotherapy for locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This multicentre, randomised, open-label, parallel phase II study assessed efficacy and safety of pemetrexed versus pemetrexed+erlotinib in patients with advanced non-squamous NSCLC. METHODS: NSCLC stage III-IV patients who failed one prior platinum-based chemotherapy regimen, ≥ 1 measurable lesion by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤ 2 were eligible. Patients received pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2) with vitamin B12 and folic acid q3w alone or combined with erlotinib 150 mg daily. The primary end-point was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end-points were overall survival (OS), time-to-treatment failure (TTTF), response and toxicity. RESULTS: Of 165 randomised non-squamous patients, 159 were treated (pemetrexed: 83; pemetrexed+erlotinib: 76). The median PFS (months; 95% CI) was 2.89 (1.94, 3.38) for pemetrexed versus 3.19 (2.86, 4.70) for pemetrexed+erlotinib (hazard ratio [HR] 0.63; 95% CI: (0.44, 0.90); P = 0.0047). The median OS (months; 95% CI) was 7.75 (5.29, 10.41) for pemetrexed versus 11.83 (8.18, 16.66) for pemetrexed+erlotinib (HR: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.46, 0.98; P = 0.019). The median TTTF (months: 95% CI) was 2.4 (1.74, 2.99) for pemetrexed versus 3.0 (2.23, 4.07) for pemetrexed+erlotinib (HR 0.64; 95% CI: 0.46, 0.89; P = 0.0034). One patient died in pemetrexed+erlotinib arm due to febrile neutropenia. Grades 3/4 drug-related toxicities (in ≥ 5% of patients) in pemetrexed/pemetrexed+erlotinib were febrile neutropenia (2.4%/10.5%), diarrhoea (1.2%/5.3%), rash (1.2%/9.2%); anaemia (6%/11.8%), leukopenia (9.6%/23.7%), neutropenia (9.6%/25.0%), and thrombocytopenia (4.8%/14.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Pemetrexed+erlotinib treatment significantly improved PFS, OS and TTTF in 2nd line non-squamous NSCLC and was associated with an increase in grade 3/4 toxicities compared with pemetrexed alone.

Treatment approaches to primary tracheal cancer.

A patient identified with tracheal cancer benefits most from evaluation by an experienced center and an extensive effort to assess the possibility of a complete surgical resection as the most efficient treatment option for cure. Localized, nonoperable disease may still be controlled by combined modality using chemotherapy and concurrent radiation.

Capecitabine and bevacizumab for non-resectable metastatic colorectal cancer patients: final results from phase II AIO KRK 0105 trial.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend treatment with capecitabine and bevacizumab for patients (pts) with non-resectable metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), although clinical data in this particular patient group are lacking. METHODS: Previously untreated patients with non-resectable mCRC were to receive capecitabine (1,250 mg/sqm bid d1-14 oral) and bevacizumab (7.5 mg/kg i.v.) every 3 weeks. Progression-free survival (PFS) was the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints include overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR) and toxicity. RESULTS: 82 pts were included: 40 female, median age 70 (range 50-86). ECOG PS 0/1/2 was 38/52/10%, respectively. Synchronous metastases were present in 58 pts. 16 pts had primary tumor in situ. Median treatment duration was 4.1 months (6 cycles). Toxicity was generally mild. ORR was 38%, with 5 complete and 23 partial responses. Median PFS was 7.0 months [95% CI (5.0-9.1)] and OS 17.9 months [95% CI (14.6-21.6)]. Second- and third-line systemic therapy was given to 57% and 33% of pts, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Besides the favourable tolerability, PFS and OS were shorter than reported by other trials. Careful patient selection for upfront capecitabine and bevacizumab is essential.

CNS Hodgkin lymphoma.

Central nervous system (CNS) involvement by Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) is rare. As a result, there is limited guidance for clinicians on how to manage these patients. Detailed information was collected on 16 patients, the largest number to date, with meningeal or parenchymal CNS-HL confirmed by histopathology (15) or CSF (1). Eight patients presented with CNS-HL at diagnosis, 2 of whom had isolated CNS disease, while 8 patients developed CNS-HL at relapse. Patients received a range of treatments including surgery or radiation alone, radiation with chemotherapy, or chemotherapy alone. Median overall survival for all 16 patients was 60.9 months from first diagnosis of HL (systemic or CNS) and 43.8 months from diagnosis of CNS-HL. Although a majority of patients have died, long-term survival is possible in patients who achieve a complete response to treatment, particularly those who present with CNS involvement or involvement of the CNS is the sole site of relapsed disease.

Pancreatic carcinosarcoma. Case report of multimodal therapy and review of the literature.

CONTEXT: Carcinosarcoma (malignant mixed tumor) is a rare variant of a pancreatic neoplasm having a dismal prognosis; very few clinical data and treatment options have been published. Unlike adenocarcinoma of the pancreas, there is nothing specific in the literature for this variant regarding postoperative treatment with chemotherapeutic agents. CASE REPORT: We report the case of a 61-year-old woman presenting with anemia. Examination revealed a mass in the pancreatic head and she underwent a partial pancreaticoduodenectomy. Histopathological examination revealed a pancreatic neoplasm with both adenomatous as well as sarcomatous characteristics. Postoperatively, the patient was treated with gemcitabine and was in a good health for 9 months. Three follow-up CT scans were done, showing complete remission. Eleven months postoperatively, the patient died from a recurrence. CONCLUSION: Carcinosarcoma of the pancreas is a very rare disease having a dismal prognosis. In addition to reviewing the literature on this entity, we present the first published case where gemcitabine was administered as a treatment modality in combination with surgery.

Reticulated platelet counts correlate with treatment response in patients with idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura and help identify the complex causes of thrombocytopenia in patients after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.

BACKGROUND: In thrombocytopenic conditions of unknown origin, quantification of reticulated platelets (RP) in the peripheral blood by flow cytometry has been shown to differentiate increased platelet (Plt) turnover from insufficient Plt production. METHODS: We used a whole blood flow cytometry method combining thiazole orange and anti-CD41a-staining to assess RP in 71 healthy subjects, six with thrombocytopenic myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS), nine with liver cirrhosis, 14 patients with idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP), and 12 patients who had undergone hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). RESULTS: Patients with MDS had normal, patients with liver cirrhosis had slightly elevated RP counts compared to healthy subjects. ITP patients had elevated RP counts, and RP >15% were associated with treatment response (P = 0.015). In 7/10 patients after HSCT, an increase of RP preceded Plt recovery, whereas in patients with secondary thrombocytopenia after normal regeneration, the assessment of RP allowed the differentiation between conditions with high Plt turnover, such as GvHD and microangiopathy, indicated by high RP counts, and graft failure, indicated by low RP counts. CONCLUSIONS: Our data provide the rationale for prospective studies on the diagnostic and prognostic value of RP counts in larger patient populations with ITP and after HSCT.

Association of ABCB1 genotypes with paclitaxel-mediated peripheral neuropathy and neutropenia.

Here, we evaluated the relationships between ABCB1 (P-glycoprotein, MDR1) polymorphisms and paclitaxel (Taxol)-induced toxicity and pharmacokinetics. Twenty-six patients were assessable for pharmacogenetics and pharmacokinetics, 22 for neurotoxicity and 18 for myelotoxicity. Patients carrying two reference alleles for the ABCB1 3435C>T polymorphism trended toward a reduced risk to develop neuropathy as compared to patients carrying at least one variant allele (P=0.09). Additionally, patients who were homozygous variant at the 2677 and 3435 loci had a significantly greater percent decrease in absolute neutrophil count at nadir (P=0.02). Neither polymorphism correlated with paclitaxel pharmacokinetics. This pilot study suggests that paclitaxel-induced neuropathy and neutropenia might be linked to inherited variants of ABCB1 through a mechanism that is unrelated to altered plasma pharmacokinetics.