A Phase II Trial of the CD40 Agonistic Antibody Sotigalimab (APX005M) in Combination with Nivolumab in Subjects with Metastatic Melanoma with Confirmed Disease Progression on Anti-PD-1 Therapy.

PURPOSE: Disease progression during or after anti-PD-1-based treatment is common in advanced melanoma. Sotigalimab is a CD40 agonist antibody with a unique epitope specificity and Fc receptor binding profile optimized for activation of CD40-expressing antigen-presenting cells. Preclinical data indicated that CD40 agonists combined with anti-PD1 could overcome resistance to anti-PD-1. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, open-label, phase II trial to evaluate the combination of sotigalimab 0.3 mg/kg and nivolumab 360 mg every 3 weeks in patients with advanced melanoma following confirmed disease progression on a PD-1 inhibitor. The primary objective was to determine the objective response rate (ORR). RESULTS: Thirty-eight subjects were enrolled and evaluable for safety. Thirty-three were evaluable for activity. Five confirmed partial responses (PR) were observed for an ORR of 15%. Two PRs are ongoing at 45.9+ and 26+ months, whereas the other three responders relapsed at 41.1, 18.7, and 18.4 months. The median duration of response was at least 26 months. Two additional patients had stable disease for >6 months. Thirty-four patients (89%) experienced at least one adverse event (AE), and 13% experienced a grade 3 AE related to sotigalimab. The most common AEs were pyrexia, chills, nausea, fatigue, pruritus, elevated liver function, rash, vomiting, headache, arthralgia, asthenia, myalgia, and diarrhea. There were no treatment-related SAEs, deaths, or discontinuation of sotigalimab due to AEs. CONCLUSIONS: Sotigalimab plus nivolumab had a favorable safety profile consistent with the toxicity profiles of each agent. The combination resulted in durable and prolonged responses in a subset of patients with anti-PD-1-resistant melanoma, warranting further evaluation in this setting. See related commentary by Wu and Luke, p. 9.

Combination of Itacitinib or Parsaclisib with Pembrolizumab in Patients with Advanced Solid Tumors: A Phase I Study.

PURPOSE: This phase Ib open-label, multicenter, platform study (NCT02646748) explored safety, tolerability, and preliminary activity of itacitinib (Janus kinase 1 inhibitor) or parsaclisib (phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase δ inhibitor) in combination with pembrolizumab [programmed death-1 (PD-1) inhibitor]. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Patients with advanced or metastatic solid tumors with disease progression following all available therapies were enrolled and received itacitinib (Part 1 initially 300 mg once daily) or parsaclisib (Part 1 initially 10 mg once daily; Part 2 all patients 0.3 mg once daily) plus pembrolizumab (200 mg every 3 weeks). RESULTS: A total of 159 patients were enrolled in the study and treated with itacitinib (Part 1, n = 49) or parsaclisib (Part 1, n = 83; Part 2, n = 27) plus pembrolizumab. The maximum tolerated/pharmacologically active doses were itacitinib 300 mg once daily and parsaclisib 30 mg once daily. Most common itacitinib treatment-related adverse events (TRAE) were fatigue, nausea, and anemia. Most common parsaclisib TRAEs were fatigue, nausea, diarrhea, and pyrexia in Part 1, and fatigue, maculopapular rash, diarrhea, nausea, and pruritus in Part 2. In patients receiving itacitinib plus pembrolizumab, four (8.2%) achieved a partial response (PR) in Part 1. Among patients receiving parsaclisib plus pembrolizumab, 5 (6.0%) achieved a complete response and 9 (10.8%) a PR in Part 1; 5 of 27 (18.5%) patients in Part 2 achieved a PR. CONCLUSIONS: Although combination of itacitinib or parsaclisib with pembrolizumab showed modest clinical activity in this study, the overall response rates observed did not support continued development in patients with solid tumors. SIGNIFICANCE: PD-1 blockade combined with targeted therapies have demonstrated encouraging preclinical activity. In this phase I study, patients with advanced solid tumors treated with pembrolizumab (PD-1 inhibitor) and either itacitinib (JAK1 inhibitor) or parsaclisib (PI3Kδ inhibitor) experienced limited clinical activity beyond that expected with checkpoint inhibition alone and showed little effect on T-cell infiltration in the tumor. These results do not support continued development of these combinations.

Long-term avelumab in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: summaries and post hoc analyses from JAVELIN Solid Tumor.

Background: This study examined patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer who received long-term avelumab (anti-PD-L1) in a large phase Ib trial (JAVELIN Solid Tumor). Methods: Patients receiving >2 years of avelumab were reviewed and exploratory descriptive analyses were conducted. Results: Individuals with varying baseline characteristics who had received up to 6 years of avelumab were reviewed. Overall, 37/340 (10.9%) had received ≥2 years of treatment; in this subgroup, best response was complete response in 5.4%, partial response in 59.5% and stable disease in 29.7%; 51.4% had continued treatment beyond disease progression. Conclusions: In this study, 11% of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer received ≥2 years of avelumab treatment and experienced prolonged response or continued clinical benefit. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02395172 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

JASPER: Phase 2 trial of first-line niraparib plus pembrolizumab in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors may synergize with programmed cell death receptor-1 (PD-1) inhibitors to enhance adaptive and innate antitumor immune responses. In the phase 2 JASPER study (NCT04475939), the PARP inhibitor niraparib was evaluated in combination with the PD-1 inhibitor pembrolizumab in patients with metastatic and/or locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: Patients whose tumors had programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) tumor proportion scores (TPS) ≥50% (cohort 1) or 1%-49% (cohort 2) received first-line niraparib (200 mg once daily) plus pembrolizumab (200 mg every 3 weeks). The primary end point was investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR). Secondary end points included duration of response (DoR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), safety, and pharmacokinetics. RESULTS: Thirty-eight patients were enrolled in cohorts 1 and 2. In cohort 1, ORR (95% confidence interval [CI]) was 56.3% (9 of 16 patients; 29.9%-80.2%); 2 of 16 patients had complete responses and 7 of 16 had partial responses (PRs). In cohort 2, ORR was 20.0% (5.7%-43.7%) with 4 of 20 PRs. In cohorts 1 and 2, the median DoR was 19.7 months (95% CI, 4.2 months to not estimable [NE]) and 9.4 months (95% CI, 4.2 months to NE), the median PFS was 8.4 months (95% CI, 3.9-22.1 months) and 4.2 months (95% CI, 2.0-6.2 months), and the median OS was NE (95% CI, 6.0 months to NE) and 7.7 months (95% CI, 4.0-12.5 months), respectively. Grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 88.2% and 85.7% of patients in cohorts 1 and 2, respectively. Safety was consistent with known profiles of single-agent niraparib and pembrolizumab. CONCLUSIONS: Niraparib plus pembrolizumab showed clinical activity in patients with advanced and/or metastatic NSCLC. LAY SUMMARY: The JASPER clinical trial studied a new combination treatment for advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Pembrolizumab, a drug approved for NSCLC, was given with niraparib. Previous research showed that these 2 drugs together might work better than either drug alone. This study found that more than half of patients with high levels of a tumor marker responded to the combination, and one-fifth of patients with lower levels of the marker responded. The types of side effects from the combination were similar to side effects from both drugs alone. These results support more research on this combination.

Efficacy and safety of first-line avelumab in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer: results from a phase Ib cohort of the JAVELIN Solid Tumor study.

INTRODUCTION: Avelumab, an antiprogrammed death ligand-1 antibody, is approved as a monotherapy for treatment of metastatic Merkel cell carcinoma and advanced urothelial carcinoma, and in combination with axitinib for advanced renal cell carcinoma. We report the efficacy and safety of first-line avelumab in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: In a phase I expansion cohort of the JAVELIN Solid Tumor trial, patients with treatment-naive, metastatic, or recurrent NSCLC received 10 mg/kg avelumab intravenously every 2 weeks. Endpoints included best overall response, duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. RESULTS: Overall, 156 patients were enrolled and treated. Median duration of follow-up was 18.6 months (range, 15 to 23 months). The objective response rate was 19.9% (95% CI, 13.9 to 27.0), including complete response in 3 (1.9%) and partial response in 28 (17.9%). Median DOR was 12.0 months (95% CI, 6.9 to not estimable). Median PFS was 4.0 months (95% CI, 2.7 to 5.4) and the 6-month PFS rate was 38.5% (95% CI, 30.7 to 46.3). Median OS was 14.1 months (95% CI, 11.3 to 16.9) and the 12-month OS rate was 56.6% (95% CI, 48.2 to 64.1). Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 107 patients (68.6%), including grade ≥3 TRAEs in 19 (12.2%). Immune-related adverse events and infusion-related reactions occurred in 31 (19.9%) and 40 patients (25.6%), respectively. No treatment-related deaths occurred. CONCLUSION: Avelumab showed antitumor activity with a tolerable safety profile as a first-line treatment in patients with advanced NSCLC. These data support further investigation of avelumab in the phase III JAVELIN Lung 100 study. TRIAL REGISTRATION DETAILS: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01772004; registered January 21, 2013.

Safety profile of avelumab in patients with advanced solid tumors: A pooled analysis of data from the phase 1 JAVELIN solid tumor and phase 2 JAVELIN Merkel 200 clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Antibodies targeting the programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)/programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) checkpoint may cause adverse events (AEs) that are linked to the mechanism of action of this therapeutic class and unique from those observed with conventional chemotherapy. METHODS: Patients with advanced solid tumors who were enrolled in the phase 1 JAVELIN Solid Tumor (1650 patients) and phase 2 JAVELIN Merkel 200 (88 patients) trials received avelumab, a human anti-PD-L1 IgG1 antibody at a dose of 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks. Treatment-related AEs (TRAEs) were graded using the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (version 4.0). In post hoc analyses, immune-related AEs (irAEs) were identified via an expanded AE list and medical review, and infusion-related reactions (IRRs) occurring ≤2 days after infusion and symptoms occurring ≤1 day after infusion and resolving ≤2 days after onset were identified based on prespecified Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) terms. RESULTS: Of the 1738 patients analyzed, grade ≥3 TRAEs occurred in 177 (10.2%); the most common were fatigue (17 patients; 1.0%) and IRR (10 patients; 0.6%). TRAEs led to discontinuation in 107 patients (6.2%) and death in 4 patients (0.2%). Grade ≥3 irAEs occurred in 39 patients (2.2%) and led to discontinuation in 34 patients (2.0%). IRRs or related symptoms occurred in 439 patients (25.3%; grade 3 in 0.5% [9 patients] and grade 4 in 0.2% [3 patients]). An IRR occurred at the time of first infusion in 79.5% of 439 patients who had an IRR, within the first 4 doses in 98.6% of 439 patients who had an IRR, and led to discontinuation in 35 patients (2.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Avelumab generally was found to be well tolerated and to have a manageable safety profile. A minority of patients experienced grade ≥3 TRAEs or irAEs, and discontinuation was uncommon. IRRs occurred mainly at the time of first infusion, and repeated events were infrequent. Cancer 2018;124:2010-7. © 2018 The Authors. Cancer published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Cancer Society. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.

Avelumab for patients with previously treated metastatic or recurrent non-small-cell lung cancer (JAVELIN Solid Tumor): dose-expansion cohort of a multicentre, open-label, phase 1b trial.

BACKGROUND: Avelumab, a human Ig-G1 monoclonal antibody targeting PD-L1 and approved in the USA for the treatment of metastatic Merkel cell carcinoma, has shown antitumour activity and an acceptable safety profile in patients with advanced solid tumours in a dose-escalation phase 1a trial. In this dose-expansion cohort of that trial, we assess avelumab treatment in a cohort of patients with advanced, platinum-treated non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: In this dose-expansion cohort of a multicentre, open-label, phase 1 study, patients with progressive or platinum-resistant metastatic or recurrent NSCLC were enrolled at 58 cancer treatment centres and academic hospitals in the USA. Eligible patients had confirmed stage IIIB or IV NSCLC with squamous or non-squamous histology, measurable disease by Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors version 1.1 (RECIST v1.1), tumour biopsy or archival sample for biomarker assessment, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 or 1, among other criteria. Patient selection was not based on PD-L1 expression or expression of other biomarkers, including EGFR or KRAS mutation or ALK translocation status. Patients received infusional avelumab monotherapy 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks until disease progression or toxicity. The primary objective was to assess safety and tolerability. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01772004; enrolment in this cohort is closed and the trial is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Sept 10, 2013, and June 24, 2014, 184 patients were enrolled and initiated treatment with avelumab. Median follow-up duration was 8·8 months (IQR 7·2-11·9). The most common treatment-related adverse events of any grade were fatigue (46 [25%] of 184 patients), infusion-related reaction (38 [21%]), and nausea (23 [13%]). Grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events occurred in 23 (13%) of 184 patients; the most common (occurring in more than two patients) were infusion-related reaction (four [2%] patients) and increased lipase level (three [2%]). 16 (9%) of 184 patients had a serious adverse event related to treatment with avelumab, with infusion-related reaction (in four [2%] patients) and dyspnoea (in two [1%]) occurring in more than one patient. Serious adverse events irrespective of cause occurred in 80 (44%) of 184 patients. Those occurring in more than five patients (≥3%) were dyspnoea (ten patients [5%]), pneumonia (nine [5%]), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (six [3%]). Immune-related treatment-related events occurred in 22 patients (12%). Of 184 patients, 22 (12% [95% CI 8-18]) achieved a confirmed objective response, including one complete response and 21 partial responses. 70 (38%) had stable disease. Overall, 92 (50%) of 184 patients achieved disease control (they had a confirmed response or stable disease as their best overall response). One patient was initially thought to have died from grade 5 radiation pneumonitis during the study; however, this adverse event was subsequently regraded to grade 3 and the death was attributed to disease progression. INTERPRETATION: Avelumab showed an acceptable safety profile and antitumour activity in patients with progressive or treatment-resistant NSCLC, providing a rationale for further studies of avelumab in this disease setting. FUNDING: Merck KGaA and Pfizer.

Neratinib after trastuzumab-based adjuvant therapy in patients with HER2-positive breast cancer (ExteNET): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Neratinib, an irreversible tyrosine-kinase inhibitor of HER1, HER2, and HER4, has clinical activity in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer. We aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of 12 months of neratinib after trastuzumab-based adjuvant therapy in patients with early-stage HER2-positive breast cancer. METHODS: We did this multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial at 495 centres in Europe, Asia, Australia, New Zealand, and North and South America. Eligible women (aged ≥18 years, or ≥20 years in Japan) had stage 1-3 HER2-positive breast cancer and had completed neoadjuvant and adjuvant trastuzumab therapy up to 2 years before randomisation. Inclusion criteria were amended on Feb 25, 2010, to include patients with stage 2-3 HER2-positive breast cancer who had completed trastuzumab therapy up to 1 year previously. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive oral neratinib 240 mg per day or matching placebo. The randomisation sequence was generated with permuted blocks stratified by hormone receptor status (hormone receptor-positive [oestrogen or progesterone receptor-positive or both] vs hormone receptor-negative [oestrogen and progesterone receptor-negative]), nodal status (0, 1-3, or ≥4), and trastuzumab adjuvant regimen (sequentially vs concurrently with chemotherapy), then implemented centrally via an interactive voice and web-response system. Patients, investigators, and trial sponsors were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was invasive disease-free survival, as defined in the original protocol, at 2 years after randomisation. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00878709. FINDINGS: Between July 9, 2009, and Oct 24, 2011, we randomly assigned 2840 women to receive neratinib (n=1420) or placebo (n=1420). Median follow-up time was 24 months (IQR 20-25) in the neratinib group and 24 months (22-25) in the placebo group. At 2 year follow-up, 70 invasive disease-free survival events had occurred in patients in the neratinib group versus 109 events in those in the placebo group (stratified hazard ratio 0·67, 95% CI 0·50-0·91; p=0·0091). The 2-year invasive disease-free survival rate was 93·9% (95% CI 92·4-95·2) in the neratinib group and 91·6% (90·0-93·0) in the placebo group. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events in patients in the neratinib group were diarrhoea (grade 3, n=561 [40%] and grade 4, n=1 [<1%] vs grade 3, n=23 [2%] in the placebo group), vomiting (grade 3, n=47 [3%] vs n=5 [<1%]), and nausea (grade 3, n=26 [2%] vs n=2 [<1%]). QT prolongation occurred in 49 (3%) patients given neratinib and 93 (7%) patients given placebo, and decreases in left ventricular ejection fraction (≥grade 2) in 19 (1%) and 15 (1%) patients, respectively. We recorded serious adverse events in 103 (7%) patients in the neratinib group and 85 (6%) patients in the placebo group. Seven (<1%) deaths (four patients in the neratinib group and three patients in the placebo group) unrelated to disease progression occurred after study drug discontinuation. The causes of death in the neratinib group were unknown (n=2), a second primary brain tumour (n=1), and acute myeloid leukaemia (n=1), and in the placebo group were a brain haemorrhage (n=1), myocardial infarction (n=1), and gastric cancer (n=1). None of the deaths were attributed to study treatment in either group. INTERPRETATION: Neratinib for 12 months significantly improved 2-year invasive disease-free survival when given after chemotherapy and trastuzumab-based adjuvant therapy to women with HER2-positive breast cancer. Longer follow-up is needed to ensure that the improvement in breast cancer outcome is maintained. FUNDING: Wyeth, Pfizer, Puma Biotechnology.

Eribulin mesylate versus ixabepilone in patients with metastatic breast cancer: a randomized Phase II study comparing the incidence of peripheral neuropathy.

Peripheral neuropathy is a common toxicity associated with tubulin-targeted chemotherapeutic agents. This Phase II study compares the incidence and severity of neuropathy associated with eribulin mesylate or ixabepilone in metastatic breast cancer (MBC). The primary objective was to assess the incidence of neuropathy; the study was designed to detect a difference in neuropathy rate of 35 % for eribulin versus 63 % for ixabepilone (odds ratio 0.316, 80 % power, 0.05 two-sided significance level). Eligibility criteria included: MBC; prior taxane therapy; at least one chemotherapy for advanced disease; no or minimal pre-existing neuropathy (Grade 0 or 1). The intent-to-treat population comprised 104 patients randomized (1:1) to eribulin mesylate (1.4 mg/m(2), 2-5 min intravenous on days 1 and 8) or ixabepilone (40 mg/m(2), 3 h intravenous on day 1) on a 21-day cycle. 101 patients in the safety population received a median of 5.0 eribulin and 3.5 ixabepilone cycles. Incidence of neuropathy (any grade) was 33.3 and 48.0 %, and peripheral neuropathy was 31.4 and 44.0 % for eribulin and ixabepilone, respectively. After controlling for pre-existing neuropathy and number of prior chemotherapies, these differences were not significant. Compared with ixabepilone, fewer patients receiving eribulin discontinued treatment due to neuropathy (3.9 vs. 18.0 %) or adverse events (AEs) in general (11.8 vs. 32.0 %). Time to onset of neuropathy was 35.9 weeks for eribulin and 11.6 weeks for ixabepilone, and time to resolution was 48 versus 10 weeks, respectively; other AEs were comparable. Objective responses were 15.4 versus 5.8 % and clinical benefit rates were 26.9 versus 19.2 %. In conclusion, after controlling for pre-existing neuropathy and number of prior chemotherapies, the differences in the incidence of neuropathy with eribulin and ixabepilone were not statistically significant. Onset of neuropathy tended to occur later with eribulin and resolve later.

Randomized phase 2b study of pralatrexate versus erlotinib in patients with stage IIIB/IV non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after failure of prior platinum-based therapy.

INTRODUCTION: Pralatrexate, a folate analogue targeting dihydrofolate reductase, has antitumor activity in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This randomized phase 2b trial was designed to further evaluate pralatrexate activity in NSCLC by estimating overall survival (OS) relative to erlotinib in patients with relapsed/refractory disease. METHODS: In 43 centers across 6 countries, patients were randomized 1:1 to receive intravenous pralatrexate 190 mg/m on days 1 and 15 of a 28-day cycle, or oral erlotinib 150 mg/day. The primary objective was to estimate OS in all patients and prespecified subgroups using relative comparisons of hazard ratios (HRs). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival, response rate, and safety. Key eligibility criteria included: (1) ≥1 prior platinum-based therapy, (2) Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 1, and 3) a smoking history of 100 cigarettes or more. RESULTS: A total of 201 patients were randomized. A trend toward improvement in OS favoring pralatrexate was observed with an HR of 0.84 (95% confidence interval: 0.61-1.14) in the intent-to-treat population. This favorable survival result was seen in most prespecified subgroups for pralatrexate. The largest reduction in the risk of death was observed in patients with nonsquamous cell carcinoma (n = 107; HR = 0.65; 95% confidence interval: 0.42-1.0). The most common grade 3 to 4 adverse event in the pralatrexate arm was mucositis (23%). Discontinuation of pralatrexate for any grade of mucositis was 21%. CONCLUSIONS: Pralatrexate demonstrated a trend toward improved survival relative to erlotinib in patients with advanced NSCLC. Future studies should include a mucositis management plan to improve tolerability and maximize treatment benefit.

A phase II study of eribulin mesylate (E7389) in patients with advanced, previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer.

INTRODUCTION: This open-label phase II study assessed the efficacy and tolerability of eribulin, a non-taxane microtubule dynamics inhibitor with novel mechanism of action, as monotherapy in patients who have advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Enrolled patients had progressed during or after platinum-based doublet chemotherapy. Initially, two patient cohorts (taxane-pre-treated and taxane-naïve) received eribulin mesylate (1.4 mg/m(2)) as a 2- to 5-minute intravenous infusion on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle. To assess tolerability of a second dosing schedule, a cohort of taxane-pre-treated patients received eribulin on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) evaluated using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) by independent radiographic review. RESULTS: One hundred three patients received eribulin. The ORR was 9.7% (all partial responses [PR]). Overall disease control rate (PR + stable disease) was 55.3%. Median duration of response, progression-free survival, and overall survival were 5.8, 3.4, and 9.4 months, respectively. The most common drug-related adverse events were neutropenia (54%; 49% grade 3/4); fatigue (49%; 11% grade 3, no grade 4); nausea (38%; 1% grade 3, no grade 4); alopecia (32%); anemia (29%, 4% grade 3/4) and neuropathy (23%; 2% grade 3, no grade 4). The 28-day schedule was associated with many dose delays, interruptions, or omissions due to neutropenia (day 15). The 21-day cycle was well-tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Eribulin monotherapy administered on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle is active and tolerated as second- or later-line chemotherapy for NSCLC.

Construction of a drug safety assurance information system based on clinical genotyping.

To capitalize on the vast potential of patient genetic information to aid in assuring drug safety, a substantial effort is needed in both the training of healthcare professionals and the operational enablement of clinical environments. Our research aims to satisfy these needs through the development of a drug safety assurance information system (GeneScription) based on clinical genotyping that utilizes patient-specific genetic information to predict and prevent adverse drug responses. In this paper, we present the motivations for this work, the algorithms at the heart of GeneScription, and a discussion of our system and its uses. We also describe our efforts to validate GeneScription through its evaluation by practicing pharmacists and pharmacy professors and its repeated use in training pharmacists. The positive assessment of the GeneScription software tool by these domain experts provides strong validation of the importance, accuracy, and effectiveness of GeneScription.

The efficacy and safety of panitumumab administered concomitantly with FOLFIRI or Irinotecan in second-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer: the secondary analysis from STEPP (Skin Toxicity Evaluation Protocol With Panitumumab) by KRAS status.

BACKGROUND: Panitumumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody targeting the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), is used as monotherapy for chemorefractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in patients with wild-type (WT) KRAS tumors. Although skin toxicities are the most common adverse events associated with EGFR inhibitors, the differences in efficacy and safety between pre-emptive and reactive skin treatment according to KRAS tumor status has not been reported. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients had mCRC with disease progression or unacceptable toxicity with first-line treatment containing fluoropyrimidine and oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy ± bevacizumab. Patients were randomized 1:1 to pre-emptive or reactive skin treatment (after skin toxicity developed). Patients received either panitumumab 6 mg/kg + FOLFIRI every 2 weeks or panitumumab 9 mg/kg + irinotecan every 3 weeks. Key study endpoints included overall response rate (ORR), overall survival, progression-free survival (PFS), and safety according to KRAS tumor status. RESULTS: Eighty-seven (92%) of 95 enrolled patients had evaluable KRAS tumor status: 49 (56%) patients with WT and 38 (44%) patients with mutant (MT) KRAS tumors, respectively. The ORR was 16% and 8% for patients with WT and MT KRAS tumors, respectively. Median PFS was 5.5 and 3.3 months for patients with WT and MT KRAS tumors, respectively. The most commonly observed adverse events by KRAS tumor status included dermatitis acneiform and pruritus. CONCLUSION: Panitumumab in combination with irinotecan-based chemotherapy has an acceptable toxicity profile in second-line therapy for mCRC. Numerical differences trending in favor of the patients with WT KRAS tumors were observed for most efficacy endpoints.

Pharmacogenomics training using an instructional software system.

OBJECTIVES: To implement an elective course in pharmacogenomics designed to teach pharmacy students about the fundamentals of pharmacogenomics and the anticipated changes it will bring to the profession. DESIGN: The 8 sessions of the course covered the basics of pharmacogenomics, genomic biotechnology, implementation of pharmacogenetics in pharmacy, information security and privacy, ethical issues related to the use of genomic data, pharmacoepidemiology, and use and promotion of GeneScription, a software program designed to mimic the professional pharmacy environment. ASSESSMENT: Student grades were based on completion of a patient education pamphlet, a 2-page paper on pharmacogenomics, and precourse and postcourse survey instruments. In the postcourse survey, all students strongly agreed that genomic data could be used to determine the optimal dose of a drug and genomic data for metabolizing enzymes could be stored in a safe place. Students also were more willing to submit deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) data for genetic profiling and better understood how DNA analysis is performed after completing the course. CONCLUSIONS: An elective course in pharmacogenomics equipped pharmacy students with the basic knowledge necessary to make clinical decisions based on pharmacogenomic data and to teach other healthcare professionals and patients about pharmacogenomics. For personalized medicine to become a reality, all pharmacists and pharmacy students must learn this knowledge and these skills.

Skin toxicity evaluation protocol with panitumumab (STEPP), a phase II, open-label, randomized trial evaluating the impact of a pre-Emptive Skin treatment regimen on skin toxicities and quality of life in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

PURPOSE: Panitumumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody targeting the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), is approved in the United States and Europe for the treatment of refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Skin toxicities are the most common adverse events with EGFR inhibitors. This is the first study designed to examine differences between pre-emptive and reactive skin treatment for specific skin toxicities in patients with mCRC for any EGFR inhibitor. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients receiving panitumumab-containing therapy were randomly assigned 1:1 to pre-emptive or reactive treatment (after skin toxicity developed). Pre-emptive treatment included use of skin moisturizers, sunscreen, topical steroid, and doxycycline. The primary end point of the study was the incidence of protocol-specified >or= grade 2 skin toxicities during the 6-week skin treatment period. Quality of life (QOL) was assessed with the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI). RESULTS: Of 95 enrolled patients, 48 received pre-emptive treatment, and 47 received reactive treatment. The incidence of protocol-specified >or= grade 2 skin toxicities during the 6-week skin treatment period was 29% and 62% for the pre-emptive and reactive groups, respectively. Mean DLQI score change from baseline to week 3 was 1.3 points and 4.2 points in the pre-emptive and reactive groups, respectively. CONCLUSION: The pre-emptive skin treatment regimen was well tolerated. The incidence of specific >or= grade 2 skin toxicities during the 6-week skin treatment period was reduced by more than 50% in the pre-emptive group compared with the reactive group. Patients in the pre-emptive group reported less QOL impairment than patients in the reactive group.

Cetuximab and first-line taxane/carboplatin chemotherapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: results of the randomized multicenter phase III trial BMS099.

PURPOSE To evaluate the efficacy of cetuximab plus taxane/carboplatin (TC) as first-line treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS This multicenter, open-label, phase III study enrolled 676 chemotherapy-naïve patients with stage IIIB (pleural effusion) or IV NSCLC, without restrictions by histology or epidermal growth factor receptor expression. Patients were randomly assigned to cetuximab/TC or TC. TC consisted of paclitaxel (225 mg/m(2)) or docetaxel (75 mg/m(2)), at the investigator's discretion, and carboplatin (area under the curve = 6) on day 1 every 3 weeks for < or = six cycles; cetuximab (400 mg/m(2) on day 1, 250 mg/m(2) weekly) was administered until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end point was progression-free survival assessed by independent radiologic review committee (PFS-IRRC); overall response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), quality of life (QoL), and safety were key secondary end points. PFS and ORR assessed by investigators were also evaluated. Results Median PFS-IRRC was 4.40 months with cetuximab/TC versus 4.24 months with TC (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.902; 95% CI, 0.761 to 1.069; P = .236). Median OS was 9.69 months with cetuximab/TC versus 8.38 months with TC (HR = 0.890; 95% CI, 0.754 to 1.051; P = .169). ORR-IRRC was 25.7% with cetuximab/TC versus 17.2% with TC (P = .007). The safety profile of this combination was manageable and consistent with its individual components. CONCLUSION The addition of cetuximab to TC did not significantly improve the primary end point, PFS-IRRC. There was significant improvement in ORR by IRRC. The difference in OS favored cetuximab but did not reach statistical significance.

Relationship of circulating tumor cells to tumor response, progression-free survival, and overall survival in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

PURPOSE: As treatment options expand for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), a blood marker with a prognostic and predictive role could guide treatment. We tested the hypothesis that circulating tumor cells (CTCs) could predict clinical outcome in patients with mCRC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a prospective multicenter study, CTCs were enumerated in the peripheral blood of 430 patients with mCRC at baseline and after starting first-, second-, or third-line therapy. CTCs were measured using an immunomagnetic separation technique. RESULTS: Patients were stratified into unfavorable and favorable prognostic groups based on CTC levels of three or more or less than three CTCs/7.5 mL, respectively. Patients with unfavorable compared with favorable baseline CTCs had shorter median progression-free survival (PFS; 4.5 v 7.9 months; P = .0002) and overall survival (OS; 9.4 v 18.5 months; P < .0001). Differences persisted at 1 to 2, 3 to 5, 6 to 12, and 13 to 20 weeks after therapy. Conversion of baseline unfavorable CTCs to favorable at 3 to 5 weeks was associated with significantly longer PFS and OS compared with patients with unfavorable CTCs at both time points (PFS, 6.2 v 1.6 months; P = .02; OS, 11.0 v 3.7 months; P = .0002). Among nonprogressing patients, favorable compared with unfavorable CTCs within 1 month of imaging was associated with longer survival (18.8 v 7.1 months; P < .0001). Baseline and follow-up CTC levels remained strong predictors of PFS and OS after adjustment for clinically significant factors. CONCLUSION: The number of CTCs before and during treatment is an independent predictor of PFS and OS in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. CTCs provide prognostic information in addition to that of imaging studies.