Long-term survival with first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a pooled analysis.

BACKGROUND: First-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab prolongs survival versus chemotherapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We further characterized clinical benefit with this regimen in a large pooled patient population and assessed the effect of response on survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data were pooled from four studies of first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab in advanced NSCLC (CheckMate 227 Part 1, 817 cohort A, 568 Part 1, and 012). Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate, duration of response, and safety were assessed. Landmark analyses of OS by response status at 6 months and by tumor burden reduction in responders to nivolumab plus ipilimumab were also assessed. RESULTS: In the pooled population (N = 1332) with a minimum follow-up of 29.1-58.9 months, median OS was 18.6 months, with a 3-year OS rate of 35%; median PFS was 5.4 months (3-year PFS rate, 17%). Objective response rate was 36%; median duration of response was 23.7 months, with 38% of responders having an ongoing response at 3 years. In patients with tumor programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) <1%, ≥1%, 1%-49%, or ≥50%, 3-year OS rates were 30%, 38%, 30%, and 48%. Three-year OS rates were 30% and 38% in patients with squamous or non-squamous histology. Efficacy outcomes in patients aged ≥75 years were similar to the overall pooled population (median OS, 20.1 months; 3-year OS rate, 34%). In the pooled population, responders to nivolumab plus ipilimumab at 6 months had longer post-landmark OS than those with stable or progressive disease; 3-year OS rates were 66%, 22%, and 14%, respectively. Greater depth of response was associated with prolonged survival; in patients with tumor burden reduction ≥80%, 50% to <80%, or 30% to <50%, 3-year OS rates were 85%, 72%, and 44%, respectively. No new safety signals were identified in the pooled population. CONCLUSION: Long-term survival benefit and durable response with nivolumab plus ipilimumab in this large patient population further support this first-line treatment option for advanced NSCLC.

Second-line nivolumab in relapsed small-cell lung cancer: CheckMate 331☆.

BACKGROUND: Patients with relapsed small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) have few treatment options and dismal survival. Phase I/II data show activity of nivolumab in previously treated SCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: CheckMate 331 is a randomized, open-label, phase III trial of nivolumab versus standard chemotherapy in relapsed SCLC. Patients with relapse after first-line, platinum-based chemotherapy were randomized 1 : 1 to nivolumab 240 mg every 2 weeks or chemotherapy (topotecan or amrubicin) until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Overall, 284 patients were randomized to nivolumab and 285 to chemotherapy. Minimum follow-up was 15.8 months. No significant improvement in OS was seen with nivolumab versus chemotherapy [median OS, 7.5 versus 8.4 months; hazard ratio (HR), 0.86; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.72-1.04; P = 0.11]. A survival benefit with nivolumab was suggested in patients with baseline lactate dehydrogenase ≤ upper limit of normal and in those without baseline liver metastases. OS (nivolumab versus chemotherapy) was similar in patients with programmed death-ligand 1 combined positive score ≥1% versus <1%. Median progression-free survival was 1.4 versus 3.8 months (HR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.18-1.69). Objective response rate was 13.7% versus 16.5% (odds ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.50-1.27); median duration of response was 8.3 versus 4.5 months. Rates of grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events were 13.8% versus 73.2%. CONCLUSION: Nivolumab did not improve survival versus chemotherapy in relapsed SCLC. No new safety signals were seen. In exploratory analyses, select baseline characteristics were associated with improved OS for nivolumab.

Safety and efficacy of quavonlimab, a novel anti-CTLA-4 antibody (MK-1308), in combination with pembrolizumab in first-line advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Quavonlimab (MK-1308), a novel anti-CTLA-4 antibody, in combination with pembrolizumab was investigated in a phase I study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Dose-escalation (DE) phase: patients with advanced/metastatic solid tumors received an initial flat dose of quavonlimab as monotherapy [25 mg (cohort 1), 75 mg (cohort 2), or 200 mg (cohort 3)] followed by four treatments of the same quavonlimab dose plus pembrolizumab every 3 weeks (Q3W). Dose-confirmation phase (DC): patients with stage IIIB/IV non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) received first-line quavonlimab [25 mg Q3W (arm A), 25 mg Q6W (arm B), 75 mg Q6W (arm C), or 75 mg Q3W (arm E)] plus pembrolizumab. Primary objectives were safety and tolerability and establishment of the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of quavonlimab when used with pembrolizumab. Objective response rate (ORR) was a secondary endpoint. Efficacy based on PD-L1 expression, tumor mutational burden (TMB), and changes in circulating CD4+/CD8+ cells were exploratory endpoints. RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients were enrolled in DE [n = 14 (cohort 1); n = 17 (cohort 2); n = 8 (cohort 3)] and 134 in DC [n = 40 (arm A); n = 40 (arm B); n = 40 (arm C); n = 14 (arm E)]. Maximum-tolerated dose was not reached. Grade 3-5 treatment-related adverse events (AEs; graded according to NCI CTCAE v4.03) occurred in 0%, 23.5%, and 75.0% of patients in DE cohorts 1, 2, and 3, respectively, and 35.0%, 30.0%, 35.0%, and 57.1% of patients in DC arms A, B, C, and E, respectively. Efficacy was observed at all dose levels/schedules in patients with NSCLC. ORRs were 40.0% [95% confidence interval (CI), 24.9-56.7; arm A], 37.5% (95% CI, 22.7-54.2; arm B), 27.5% (95% CI, 14.6-43.9; arm C), and 35.7% (95% CI, 12.8-64.9; arm E). PD-L1 expression and total number of circulating CD4+ cells correlated with ORR. CONCLUSIONS: Quavonlimab 25 mg Q6W plus pembrolizumab demonstrated similar efficacy and a better safety profile among all quavonlimab doses/schedules evaluated; this regimen was the chosen RP2D.

Outcomes with durvalumab by tumour PD-L1 expression in unresectable, stage III non-small-cell lung cancer in the PACIFIC trial.

BACKGROUND: In the PACIFIC trial, durvalumab significantly improved progression-free and overall survival (PFS/OS) versus placebo, with manageable safety, in unresectable, stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients without progression after chemoradiotherapy (CRT). We report exploratory analyses of outcomes by tumour cell (TC) programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to intravenous durvalumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks or placebo ≤12 months, stratified by age, sex, and smoking history, but not PD-L1 status. Where available, pre-CRT samples were tested for PD-L1 expression (immunohistochemistry) and scored at pre-specified (25%) and post hoc (1%) TC cut-offs. Treatment-effect hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated from unstratified Cox proportional hazards models (Kaplan-Meier-estimated medians). RESULTS: In total, 713 patients were randomly assigned, 709 of whom received at least 1 dose of study treatment durvalumab (n = 473) or placebo (n = 236). Some 451 (63%) were PD-L1-assessable: 35%, 65%, 67%, 33%, and 32% had TC ≥25%, <25%, ≥1%, <1%, and 1%-24%, respectively. As of 31 January 2019, median follow-up was 33.3 months. Durvalumab improved PFS versus placebo (primary-analysis data cut-off, 13 February 2017) across all subgroups [HR, 95% confidence interval (CI); medians]: TC ≥25% (0.41, 0.26-0.65; 17.8 versus 3.7 months), <25% (0.59, 0.43-0.82; 16.9 versus 6.9 months), ≥1% (0.46, 0.33-0.64; 17.8 versus 5.6 months), <1% (0.73, 0.48-1.11; 10.7 versus 5.6 months), 1%-24% [0.49, 0.30-0.80; not reached (NR) versus 9.0 months], and unknown (0.59, 0.42-0.83; 14.0 versus 6.4 months). Durvalumab improved OS across most subgroups (31 January 2019 data cut-off; HR, 95% CI; medians): TC ≥ 25% (0.50, 0.30-0.83; NR versus 21.1 months), <25% (0.89, 0.63-1.25; 39.7 versus 37.4 months), ≥1% (0.59, 0.41-0.83; NR versus 29.6 months), 1%-24% (0.67, 0.41-1.10; 43.3 versus 30.5 months), and unknown (0.60, 0.43-0.84; 44.2 versus 23.5 months), but not <1% (1.14, 0.71-1.84; 33.1 versus 45.6 months). Safety was similar across subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: PFS benefit with durvalumab was observed across all subgroups, and OS benefit across all but TC <1%, for which limitations and wide HR CI preclude robust conclusions.

Targeted therapy for advanced salivary gland carcinoma based on molecular profiling: results from MyPathway, a phase IIa multiple basket study.

BACKGROUND: Systemic therapy options for salivary cancers are limited. MyPathway (NCT02091141), a phase IIa study, evaluates targeted therapies in non-indicated tumor types with actionable molecular alterations. Here, we present the efficacy and safety results for a subgroup of MyPathway patients with advanced salivary gland cancer (SGC) matched to targeted therapies based on tumor molecular characteristics. PATIENTS AND METHODS: MyPathway is an ongoing, multiple basket, open-label, non-randomized, multi-center study. Patients with advanced SGC received pertuzumab + trastuzumab (HER2 alteration), vismodegib (PTCH-1/SMO mutation), vemurafenib (BRAF V600 mutation), or atezolizumab [high tumor mutational burden (TMB)]. The primary endpoint is the objective response rate (ORR). RESULTS: As of January 15, 2018, 19 patients with SGC were enrolled and treated in MyPathway (15 with HER2 amplification and/or overexpression and one each with a HER2 mutation without amplification or overexpression, PTCH-1 mutation, BRAF mutation, and high TMB). In the 15 patients with HER2 amplification/overexpression (with or without mutations) who were treated with pertuzumab + trastuzumab, 9 had an objective response (1 complete response, 8 partial responses) for an ORR of 60% (9.2 months median response duration). The clinical benefit rate (defined by patients with objective responses or stable disease >4 months) was 67% (10/15), median progression-free survival (PFS) was 8.6 months, and median overall survival was 20.4 months. Stable disease was observed in the patient with a HER2 mutation (pertuzumab + trastuzumab, n = 1/1, PFS 11.0 months), and partial responses in patients with the PTCH-1 mutation (vismodegib, n = 1/1, PFS 14.3 months), BRAF mutation (vemurafenib, n = 1/1, PFS 18.5 months), and high TMB (atezolizumab, n = 1/1, PFS 5.5+ months). No unexpected toxicity occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, 12 of 19 patients (63%) with advanced SGC, treated with chemotherapy-free regimens matched to specific molecular alterations, experienced an objective response. Data from MyPathway suggest that matched targeted therapy for SGC has promising efficacy, supporting molecular profiling in treatment determination.

Predictive biomarkers for response to EGFR-directed monoclonal antibodies for advanced squamous cell lung cancer.

Background: Upregulated expression and aberrant activation of the epidermal growth-factor receptor (EGFR) are found in lung cancer, making EGFR a relevant target for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Treatment with anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) is associated with modest improvement in overall survival in patients with squamous cell lung cancer (SqCLC) who have a significant unmet need for effective treatment options. While there is evidence that using EGFR gene copy number, EGFR mutation, and EGFR protein expression as biomarkers can help select patients who respond to treatment, it is important to consider biomarkers for response in patients treated with combination therapies that include EGFR mAbs. Design: Randomized trials of EGFR-directed mAbs cetuximab and necitumumab in combination with chemotherapy, immunotherapy, or antiangiogenic therapy in patients with advanced NSCLC, including SqCLC, were searched in the literature. Results of associations of potential biomarkers and outcomes were summarized. Results: Data from phase III clinical trials indicate that patients with NSCLC, including SqCLC, whose tumors express high levels of EGFR protein (H-score of ≥200) and/or gene copy numbers of EGFR (e.g. ≥40% cells with ≥4 EGFR copies as detected by fluorescence in situ hybridization; gene amplification in ≥10% of analyzed cells) derive greater therapeutic benefits from EGFR-directed mAbs. Biomarker data are limited for EGFR mAbs used in combination with immunotherapy and are absent when used in combination with antiangiogenic agents. Conclusions: Therapy with EGFR-directed mAbs in combination with chemotherapy is associated with greater clinical benefits in patients with NSCLC, including SqCLC, whose tumors express high levels of EGFR protein and/or have increased EGFR gene copy number. These data support validating the role of these as biomarkers to identify those patients who derive the greatest clinical benefit from EGFR mAb therapy. However, data on biomarkers for EGFR-directed mAbs combined with immunotherapy or antiangiogenic agents remain limited.

Randomized phase III study of docetaxel plus bavituximab in previously treated advanced non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer.

Background: Bavituximab is a monoclonal antibody that targets phosphatidylserine in the presence of ß2 glycoprotein 1 (ß2GP1) to exert an antitumor immune response. This phase III trial determined the efficacy of bavituximab combined with docetaxel in patients with previously treated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients and methods: Key eligibility criteria included advanced non-squamous NSCLC with disease progression after treatment with platinum-based doublet chemotherapy, evidence of disease control after at least two cycles of first-line therapy, presence of measurable disease, ECOG performance status 0 or 1, adequate bone marrow and organ function, and no recent history of clinically significant bleeding. Eligible patients were randomized 1 : 1 to receive up to six 21-day cycles of docetaxel plus either weekly bavituximab 3 mg/kg or placebo until progression or toxicity. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Results: A total of 597 patients were enrolled. Median OS was 10.5 months in the docetaxel + bavituximab arm and was 10.9 months in the docetaxel + placebo arm (HR 1.06; 95% CI 0.88-1.29; P = 0.533). There was no difference in progression-free survival (HR 1.00; 95% CI 0.82-1.22; P = 0.990). Toxicities were manageable and similar between arms. In subset analysis, among patients with high baseline serum ß2GP1 levels ≥200 µg/ml, a nonsignificant OS trend favored the bavituximab arm (HR 0.82; 95% CI 0.63-1.06; P = 0.134). Among patients who received post-study immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy, OS favored the bavituximab arm (HR 0.46; 95% CI 0.26-0.81; P = 0.006). Conclusions: The combination of bavituximab plus docetaxel is not superior to docetaxel in patients with previously treated advanced NSCLC. The addition of bavituximab to docetaxel does not meaningfully increase toxicity. The potential benefit of bavituximab observed in patients with high ß2GP1 levels and in patients subsequently treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors requires further investigation. Clinical trial number: NCT01999673.

Nivolumab versus docetaxel in previously treated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (CheckMate 017 and CheckMate 057): 3-year update and outcomes in patients with liver metastases.

Background: Long-term data with immune checkpoint inhibitors in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are limited. Two phase III trials demonstrated improved overall survival (OS) and a favorable safety profile with the anti-programmed death-1 antibody nivolumab versus docetaxel in patients with previously treated advanced squamous (CheckMate 017) and nonsquamous (CheckMate 057) NSCLC. We report results from ≥3 years' follow-up, including subgroup analyses of patients with liver metastases, who historically have poorer prognosis among patients with NSCLC. Patients and methods: Patients were randomized 1 : 1 to nivolumab (3 mg/kg every 2 weeks) or docetaxel (75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks) until progression or discontinuation. The primary end point of each study was OS. Patients with baseline liver metastases were pooled across studies by treatment for subgroup analyses. Results: After 40.3 months' minimum follow-up in CheckMate 017 and 057, nivolumab continued to show an OS benefit versus docetaxel: estimated 3-year OS rates were 17% [95% confidence interval (CI), 14% to 21%] versus 8% (95% CI, 6% to 11%) in the pooled population with squamous or nonsquamous NSCLC. Nivolumab was generally well tolerated, with no new safety concerns identified. Of 854 randomized patients across both studies, 193 had baseline liver metastases. Nivolumab resulted in improved OS compared with docetaxel in patients with liver metastases (hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.50-0.91), consistent with findings from the overall pooled study population (hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.61-0.81). Rates of treatment-related hepatic adverse events (primarily grade 1-2 liver enzyme elevations) were slightly higher in nivolumab-treated patients with liver metastases (10%) than in the overall pooled population (6%). Conclusions: After 3 years' minimum follow-up, nivolumab continued to demonstrate an OS benefit versus docetaxel in patients with advanced NSCLC. Similarly, nivolumab demonstrated an OS benefit versus docetaxel in patients with liver metastases, and remained well tolerated. Clinical trial registration: CheckMate 017: NCT01642004; CheckMate 057: NCT01673867.

A randomized, open-label, multicenter, phase 3 study to compare the efficacy and safety of eribulin to treatment of physician's choice in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Eribulin is a microtubule dynamics inhibitor with a novel mechanism of action. This phase 3 study aimed to compare overall survival (OS) in patients with heavily pretreated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) receiving eribulin to treatment of physician's choice (TPC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced NSCLC who had received ≥2 prior therapies, including platinum-based doublet and epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor, were randomly assigned to receive eribulin or TPC (gemcitabine, pemetrexed, vinorelbine, docetaxel). The primary endpoint was OS. Secondary endpoints were progression-free survival and objective response rate. RESULTS: Five hundred and forty patients were randomized to either eribulin (n = 270) or TPC (n = 270). Median OS for eribulin and TPC was the same: 9.5 months [hazard ratio (HR): 1.16; 95% confidence interval: 0.95-1.41; P = 0.13]. Progression-free survival for eribulin and TPC was 3.0 and 2.8 months, respectively (HR: 1.09; 95% confidence interval: 0.90-1.32; P = 0.39). The objective response rate was 12% for eribulin and 15% for TPC. Clinical benefit rate (eribulin, 57%; TPC, 55%) and disease control rate (eribulin, 63%; TPC, 58%) were similar between treatment arms. The most common adverse event was neutropenia, which occurred in 57% of eribulin patients and 49% of TPC patients at all grades. Other non-hematologic side-effects were manageable and similar in both groups except for peripheral sensory neuropathy (all grades; eribulin, 16%; TPC, 9%). CONCLUSION: This phase 3 study did not demonstrate superiority of eribulin over TPC with regard to overall survival. However, eribulin does show activity in the third-line setting for NSCLC. TRIAL REGISTRATION ID: www.ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT01454934.

Clinical outcomes in elderly patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer: results from ARIES, a bevacizumab observational cohort study.

AIMS: Retrospective analyses from first-line clinical studies in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have reported conflicting results on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival benefits with the addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy in elderly patients. Here we report effectiveness and safety outcomes by age subgroup for patients with NSCLC in the ARIES observational cohort study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: ARIES enrolled patients with advanced non-squamous NSCLC who received first-line bevacizumab-containing treatment per physician's choice. Kaplan-Meier estimates were used to calculate medians and 95% confidence intervals for PFS and overall survival for patients aged <65, ≥65, <75 and ≥75 years. RESULTS: In total, 1967 patients receiving first-line treatment with bevacizumab and chemotherapy were enrolled. The median PFS and overall survival values were 6.4 (95% confidence interval = 6.0-6.8) and 14.2 (95% confidence interval = 12.7-15.2) months for patients aged <65 years, respectively, and 6.8 (95% confidence interval = 6.3-7.0) and 12.1 (95% confidence interval = 11.4-13.1) months for patients ≥65 years, respectively. For patients <75 years, the median PFS and overall survival values were 6.6 (95% confidence interval = 6.3-6.9) and 13.5 (95% confidence interval = 12.6-14.5) months, respectively, and 6.6 (95% confidence interval = 5.9-7.1) and 11.6 (95% confidence interval = 10.0-12.5) months, respectively, for patients ≥75 years. Incidence proportions of bevacizumab-associated adverse events were generally similar across all age groups. CONCLUSIONS: Data from the ARIES study suggest that treatment with bevacizumab in combination with chemotherapy is a viable first-line treatment option for elderly bevacizumab-eligible patients with advanced non-squamous NSCLC.

A randomized phase II study of the telomerase inhibitor imetelstat as maintenance therapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Continuation or 'switch' maintenance therapy is commonly used in patients with advancd non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Here, we evaluated the efficacy of the telomerase inhibitor, imetelstat, as switch maintenance therapy in patients with advanced NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The primary end point of this open-label, randomized phase II study was progression-free survival (PFS). Patients with non-progressive, advanced NSCLC after platinum-based doublet (first-line) chemotherapy (with or without bevacizumab), any histology, with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1 were eligible. Randomization was 2 : 1 in favor of imetelstat, administered at 9.4 mg/kg on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle, or observation. Telomere length (TL) biomarker exploratory analysis was carried out in tumor tissue by quantitative PCR (qPCR) and telomerase fluorescence in situ hybridization. RESULTS: Of 116 patients enrolled, 114 were evaluable. Grade 3/4 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia were more frequent with imetelstat. Median PFS was 2.8 and 2.6 months for imetelstat-treated versus control [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.844; 95% CI 0.54-1.31; P = 0.446]. Median survival time favored imetelstat (14.3 versus 11.5 months), although not significantly (HR = 0.68; 95% CI 0.41-1.12; P = 0.129). Exploratory analysis demonstrated a trend toward longer median PFS (HR = 0.43; 95% CI 0.14-1.3; P = 0.124) and overall survival (OS; HR = 0.41; 95% CI 0.11-1.46; P = 0.155) in imetelstat-treated patients with short TL, but no improvement in median PFS and OS in patients with long TL (HR = 0.86; 95% CI 0.39-1.88; and HR = 0.51; 95% CI 0.2-1.28; P = 0.145). CONCLUSIONS: Maintenance imetelstat failed to improve PFS in advanced NSCLC patients responding to first-line therapy. There was a trend toward a improvement in median PFS and OS in patients with short TL. Short TL as a predictive biomarker will require further investigation for the clinical development of imetelstat.

Phase III study (MONET1) of motesanib plus carboplatin/paclitaxel in patients with advanced nonsquamous nonsmall-cell lung cancer (NSCLC): Asian subgroup analysis.

BACKGROUND: This preplanned subset analysis of the phase III MONET1 study aimed to determine whether motesanib combined with carboplatin/paclitaxel (C/P) would result in improved overall survival (OS) versus chemotherapy alone, in a subset of Asian patients with nonsquamous nonsmall-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with nonsquamous NSCLC (stage IIIB/IV or recurrent) and no prior systemic therapy for advanced disease were randomized to IV carboplatin (AUC, 6 mg/ml min) and paclitaxel (200 mg/m2) for up to six 3-week cycles, plus either oral motesanib 125 mg q.d. or placebo. Primary end point was OS; secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and safety. RESULTS: Two hundred twenty-seven Asian patients from MONET1 were included in this descriptive analysis. Median OS was 20.9 months in the motesanib plus C/P arm and 14.5 months in the placebo plus C/P arm (P=0.0223); median PFS was 7.0 and 5.3 months, respectively, (P=0.0004); and ORR was 62% and 27%, respectively, (P<0.0001). Grade≥3 adverse events were more common in the motesanib plus C/P arm versus placebo plus C/P (79% versus 61%). CONCLUSION: In this preplanned subset analysis of Asian patients with nonsquamous NSCLC, motesanib plus C/P significantly improved OS, PFS, and ORR versus placebo plus C/P. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: NCT00460317.

Predicting and managing the risk of pulmonary haemorrhage in patients with NSCLC treated with bevacizumab: a consensus report from a panel of experts.

BACKGROUND: Bevacizumab is a monoclonal antibody against vascular endothelial growth factor. Severe pulmonary haemorrhage (PH) is a rare but serious potential adverse event associated with bevacizumab therapy for advanced non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: A panel of expert oncologists, pulmonologists and radiologists reviewed the available data to identify predictive factors for PH in order to help guide physicians using bevacizumab in patients with NSCLC. RESULTS: Patients with NSCLC are at an increased risk of PH owing to the underlying disease process. Patients with squamous histology and/or a history of grade ≥ 2 haemoptysis (≥ 2.5 ml per event) should not receive bevacizumab. No clinical or radiological features (including cavitation and central tumour location) reliably predict severe PH in bevacizumab-treated patients. Major blood vessel infiltration and bronchial vessel infiltration, encasement and abutting may predict PH; however, standardised radiological criteria for defining infiltration have not been established. Eligibility for bevacizumab is not affected by patient age, performance status or anticoagulation or antiplatelet therapy. CONCLUSIONS: An individualised risk-benefit assessment should be undertaken in all patients with NSCLC in whom bevacizumab is being considered. Further research is required to elucidate the mechanisms underlying PH and the clinical risk factors.

Role for c-jun N-terminal kinase in treatment-refractory acute myeloid leukemia (AML): signaling to multidrug-efflux and hyperproliferation.

A relationship was proved between constitutive activity of leukemic cell c-jun-N-terminal kinase (JNK) and treatment failure in AML. Specifically, early treatment failure was predicted by the presence of constitutive JNK activity. The mechanistic origins of this association was sought. A multidrug resistant leukemic cell line, HL-60/ADR, characterized by hyperexpression of c-jun and JNK activity, was transfected with a mutant c-jun vector, whose substrate N-terminal c-jun serines were mutated. Down-regulated expression occurred of c-jun/AP-1-dependent genes, catalase and glutathione-S-transferase (GST) pi, which participate in cellular homeostasis to oxidative stress and xenobiotic exposure. MRP-efflux was abrogated in HL-60/ADR cells with dominant-negative c-jun, perhaps because MRP1 protein expression was also lost. Heightened sensitivity to daunorubicin resulted in cells subjected to this change. Biochemical analysis in 67 primary adult AML samples established a statistical correlation between cellular expression of c-jun and JNK activity, JNK activity with hyperleukocytosis at presentation of disease, and with exuberant MRP efflux. These findings reflect the survival role for c-jun/AP-1 and its regulatory kinase previously demonstrated for yeast in homeostatic response to oxidative stress and in operation of ATP-binding cassette efflux pumps, and may support evolutionary conservation of such function. Thus, JNK and c-jun may be salient drug targets in multidrug resistant AML.

One microgram is the lowest ACTH dose to cause a maximal cortisol response. There is no diurnal variation of cortisol response to submaximal ACTH stimulation.

There are many suggestions in the literature that the adrenal gland is more sensitive to ACTH in the evening than in the morning. However, all these studies in humans were conducted when the basal cortisol level was not suppressed, and were based on the observation that, after stimulation, the increases in cortisol differed, though the peak values were the same. To examine this, we established the lowest ACTH dose that caused a maximal cortisol stimulation even when the basal cortisol was suppressed, and used a smaller dose of ACTH for morning and evening stimulation. The lowest ACTH dose to achieve maximal stimulation was found to be 1.0 microgram, with which dose cortisol concentration increased to 607.2 +/- 182 nmol/l, compared with 612.7 +/- 140.8 nmol/l with the 250 micrograms test (P > 0.3). The use of smaller doses of ACTH (0.8 and 0.6 microgram) achieved significantly lower cortisol responses (312 +/- 179.4 and 323 +/- 157.3 nmol/l respectively; both P < 0.01 compared with the 1 microgram test). When a submaximal ACTH dose (0.6 microgram) was used to stimulate the adrenal at 0800 and 1600 h, after pretreatment with dexamethasone, no difference in response was noted at either 15 min (372.6 +/- 116 compared with 394.7 +/- 129.7 nmol/l) or 30 min (397.4 +/- 176.6 compared with 403 +/- 226.3 nmol/l; P > 0.3 for both times). These results show that 1.0 microgram ACTH, used latterly as a low-dose test, is very potent in stimulating the adrenal, even when baseline cortisol is suppressed; smaller doses cause reduction of this potency. Our data show that there is probably no diurnal variation in the response of the adrenal to ACTH, if one eliminates the influence of the basal cortisol level and uses physiologic rather than superphysiologic stimuli.