A Dose-finding Study Followed by a Phase II Randomized, Placebo-controlled Trial of Chemoradiotherapy With or Without Veliparib in Stage III Non-small-cell Lung Cancer: SWOG 1206 (8811).

BACKGROUND: We conducted a 2-part study to evaluate the incorporation of veliparib, a PARP inhibitor, into chemoradiotherapy (CRT) for stage III non-small-cell lung cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In the phase I part, patients were treated successively at 3 dose levels of veliparib (40, 80, and 120 mg) twice daily during CRT. In the phase II part, patients were randomized to receive veliparib or placebo during thoracic radiotherapy with concurrent weekly carboplatin and paclitaxel, followed by 2 cycles of consolidation carboplatin and paclitaxel with veliparib or placebo. The study was prematurely discontinued owing to the emergence of adjuvant immunotherapy as standard of care. RESULTS: Of 21 patients enrolled in phase I, 2 patients developed dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs): 1 grade 3 esophagitis with dysphagia (at 40 mg) and 1 grade 3 esophagitis with dehydration (at 80 mg). No DLTs were seen at veliparib dose of 120 mg twice daily, which was selected for the phase II part that enrolled 31 eligible patients. Progression-free survival (PFS) was not different between the 2 arms (P = .20). For the veliparib and placebo arms, response rates were 56% and 69%, PFS at 1 year 47% and 46%, and overall survival at 1 year 89% and 54%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Veliparib with CRT was feasible and well tolerated. Efficacy could not accurately be determined because of early study closure. Nonetheless, there is enthusiasm for the evaluation of PARP inhibitors in lung cancer as predictive biomarkers are being developed and combinations with immunotherapy are attractive.

Pharmacokinetics, safety, and efficacy of APF530 (extended-release granisetron) in patients receiving moderately or highly emetogenic chemotherapy: results of two Phase II trials.

BACKGROUND: Despite advances with new therapies, a significant proportion of patients (>30%) suffer delayed-onset chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) despite use of antiemetics. APF530 is a sustained-release subcutaneous (SC) formulation of granisetron for preventing CINV. APF530 pharmacokinetics, safety, and efficacy were studied in two open-label, single-dose Phase II trials (C2005-01 and C2007-01, respectively) in patients receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapy or highly emetogenic chemotherapy. METHODS: In C2005-01, 45 patients received APF530 250, 500, or 750 mg SC (granisetron 5, 10, or 15 mg, respectively). In C2007-01, 35 patients were randomized to APF530 250 or 500 mg SC. Injections were given 30 to 60 minutes before single-day moderately emetogenic chemotherapy or highly emetogenic chemotherapy. Plasma granisetron was measured from predose to 168 hours after study drug administration. Safety and efficacy were also evaluated. RESULTS: APF530 pharmacokinetics were dose proportional, with slow absorption and elimination of granisetron after a single SC dose. Median time to maximum plasma concentration and half-life were similar for APF530 250 and 500 mg in both trials, with no differences between the groups receiving moderately and highly emetogenic chemotherapy. Exposure to granisetron was maintained at a therapeutic level over the delayed-onset phase, at least 168 hours. Adverse events in both trials were as expected for granisetron; injection site reactions (eg, erythema and induration) were predominantly mild and seen in ≤20% of patients. Complete responses (no emesis, with no rescue medication) were obtained in the acute, delayed, and overall phases in ≥80% and ≥75% of patients in both trials with the 250 and 500 mg doses, respectively. CONCLUSION: After a single injection of APF530, there were dose-proportional pharmacokinetics and sustained concentrations of granisetron over 168 hours. The 250 and 500 mg doses were well tolerated and maintained therapeutic granisetron levels for ≥5 days.

Nabiximols for opioid-treated cancer patients with poorly-controlled chronic pain: a randomized, placebo-controlled, graded-dose trial.

UNLABELLED: Patients with advanced cancer who have pain that responds poorly to opioid therapy pose a clinical challenge. Nabiximols (Nabiximols is the U.S. Adopted Name [USAN] for Sativex [GW Pharma Ltd, Wiltshire, U.K.], which does not yet have an INN), a novel cannabinoid formulation, is undergoing investigation as add-on therapy for this population. In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, graded-dose study, patients with advanced cancer and opioid-refractory pain received placebo or nabiximols at a low dose (1-4 sprays/day), medium dose (6-10 sprays/day), or high dose (11-16 sprays/day). Average pain, worst pain and sleep disruption were measured daily during 5 weeks of treatment; other questionnaires measured quality of life and mood. A total of 360 patients were randomized; 263 completed. There were no baseline differences across groups. The 30% responder rate primary analysis was not significant for nabiximols versus placebo (overall P = .59). A secondary continuous responder analysis of average daily pain from baseline to end of study demonstrated that the proportion of patients reporting analgesia was greater for nabiximols than placebo overall (P = .035), and specifically in the low-dose (P = .008) and medium-dose (P = .039) groups. In the low-dose group, results were similar for mean average pain (P = .006), mean worst pain (P = .011), and mean sleep disruption (P = .003). Other questionnaires showed no significant group differences. Adverse events were dose-related and only the high-dose group compared unfavorably with placebo. This study supports the efficacy and safety of nabiximols at the 2 lower-dose levels and provides important dose information for future trials. PERSPECTIVE: Nabiximols, a novel cannabinoid formulation, may be a useful add-on analgesic for patients with opioid-refractory cancer pain. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, graded-dose study demonstrated efficacy and safety at low and medium doses.

XL647--a multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor: results of a phase II study in subjects with non-small cell lung cancer who have progressed after responding to treatment with either gefitinib or erlotinib.

INTRODUCTION: Although patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) whose tumors harbor epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) activating mutations commonly experience significant regressions when treated with erlotinib or gefitinib, they uniformly develop resistance to these agents. The secondary EGFR T790M mutation is found in 50% of patients with acquired resistance. Herein, we studied XL647, an oral small molecule inhibitor of multiple receptor tyrosine kinases, including EGFR, VEGFR2, HER2, and EphB4, in NSCLC patients known or suspected of having tumors harboring T790M. METHODS: Eligible patients included those with relapsed or recurrent advanced NSCLC who progressed after ≥12 weeks of stable disease or response to erlotinib or gefitinib and/or those patients with a documented EGFR T790M. XL647 300 mg was administered once daily. The primary end point was objective response rate. Pretreatment plasma samples were collected for mutation testing of circulating tumor DNA. RESULTS: Forty-one patients were enrolled; 33 were evaluable for efficacy. One partial response was observed (response rate 3% and 90% confidence interval, 0% to 14%). Of patients whose tumors harbored T790M, 67% (8/12) had progression of disease as best response compared with 14% (3/21) of those without this mutation. Plasma samples from 40 patients were available for mutation testing, 14 (35%) of which were found to have EGFR mutations. CONCLUSIONS: The 3% response rate observed did not meet the prespecified threshold to recommend further study of XL647 in patients who develop acquired resistance to erlotinib or gefitinib. Patients with T790M had a significantly worse progression-free survival.

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.

Extended safety and efficacy data on S-1 plus cisplatin in patients with untreated, advanced gastric carcinoma in a multicenter phase II study.

BACKGROUND: S-1 is a promising oral fluoropyrimidine. The authors obtained extended Phase II safety and efficacy data in a multicenter setting for the S-1 plus cisplatin combination: The experimental arm of the global Phase III First-Line Advanced Gastric Cancer Study (FLAGS) is being compared with 5-fluorouracil/cisplatin. METHODS: Eligible patients had untreated, histologically confirmed advanced gastric cancer (AGC), a Karnofsky performance status (KPS) > or =70%, adequate organ function, and provided written consent. Patients received S-1 (25 mg/m(2) twice daily on Days 1 through 21) plus cisplatin (75 mg/m(2) on Day 1) every 28 days. The confirmed overall response rate (CORR) also was designated by an external review. The time to progression (TTP), median survival (MS), and safety were assessed. RESULTS: All 72 patients were assessed for safety and survival, and 64 patients were assessed for CORR. The median KPS was 90%. The median number of treatment cycles was 4. The CORR was 55% (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 42-67%). The median duration of response was >5 months. At 6 months, only an estimated 38% of patients had cancer progression. The estimated MS was 10.4 months (95% CI, 8.6-12.9 months). At least 1 serious adverse event occurred in 44% of patients. The frequent grade 3 or 4 toxicities (using the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria), which occurred in >10% of patients, included fatigue/asthenia (24%), emesis (17%), nausea (15%), diarrhea (13%), and neutropenia (19%). Complicated neutropenia (1.4%) and grade 4 diarrhea (1.4%) were rare. CONCLUSIONS: The current extended data confirmed that S-1 combined with cisplatin had a highly desirable safety profile. The efficacy against AGC, according to an external review, was encouraging. FLAGS is expected to complete its accrual of 1050 patients by December 2007.

Multicenter phase II trial of S-1 plus cisplatin in patients with untreated advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma.

PURPOSE: S-1 plus cisplatin is considered highly active in Japanese gastric cancer patients. We conducted a phase II multi-institutional trial, in the West, in patients with untreated advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma to evaluate activity and safety of this combination. METHODS: Patients received cisplatin intravenously at 75 mg/m2 on day 1 and S-1 orally at 25 mg/m2/dose bid (50 mg/m2/d) on days 1 to 21, repeated every 28 days. Patients with histologic proof of gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma with a Karnofsky performance status (KPS) of > or = 70% and near-normal organ function were eligible. All patients provided a written informed consent. To observe a 45% confirmed overall response rate (ORR), 41 assessable patients were needed. RESULTS: All 47 patients were assessed for safety and survival, and 41 patients were assessed for ORR. The median age was 56 years and median KPS was 80%. The median number of chemotherapy cycles was four. The confirmed ORR was 51% (95% CI, 35% to 67%) and it was 49% by an independent review. At the 6-month interval, 71% of patients were alive, with a median survival time of 10.9 months. Frequent grade 3 or 4 toxicities included fatigue (26%), neutropenia (26%), vomiting (17%), diarrhea (15%), and nausea (15%); however, stomatitis (2%) and febrile neutropenia (2%) were uncommon. There was one (2%) treatment-related death. CONCLUSION: S-1 plus cisplatin is active against gastric cancer and has a favorable toxicity profile. A global phase III study of S-1 plus cisplatin versus fluorouracil plus cisplatin currently is accruing patients.

Safety and pain palliation of zoledronic acid in patients with breast cancer, prostate cancer, or multiple myeloma who previously received bisphosphonate therapy.

An open-label study conducted in community centers assessed the safety of zoledronic acid 4 mg intravenously over 15 minutes every 3-4 weeks as treatment of bone metastases in patients with multiple myeloma, breast cancer, or prostate cancer with and without previous bisphosphonate exposure. Adverse events (AEs), pain, and quality-of-life (QOL) scores were recorded, and serum creatinine (SCr) levels were measured before each infusion. Of 638 patients, 415 patients (65%) had received prior bisphosphonate therapy. Fatigue, nausea, and arthralgia were the most frequent AEs. Nausea was more common in bisphosphonate-naive patients. SCr levels increased notably in 6.6% of patients: 7.7% of patients who received prior bisphosphonate therapy and 4.5% of bisphosphonate-naive patients. Treatment was delayed because of SCr-level increases in 1.4% of patients with prior bisphosphonate exposure and 0.4% of bisphosphonate-naive patients. SCr-level increases and treatment delays did not correlate with duration of prior bisphosphonate therapy. There was a trend towards more treatment discontinuations in patients with prior bisphosphonate exposure compared with bisphosphonate-naive patients. Pain scores decreased from baseline; total QOL scores remained constant. The results of this study suggest that, with proper SCr-level monitoring, cancer patients with bone metastases who have previously received intravenous bisphosphonate treatment can be safely converted to zoledronic acid therapy.

Long-term efficacy and safety of zoledronic acid in the treatment of skeletal metastases in patients with nonsmall cell lung carcinoma and other solid tumors: a randomized, Phase III, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The authors previously reported the efficacy of a dose of 4 mg of zoledronic acid in reducing skeletal complications in patients with bone metastases secondary to lung carcinoma and other solid tumors (except carcinomas of the breast and prostate). In the current study, they update these results and report the long-term efficacy and safety of 21 months of treatment with zoledronic acid in a randomized, placebo-controlled trial. METHODS: A total of 773 patients were randomized to receive zoledronic acid (4 mg or 8 mg) or placebo via a 15-minute infusion every 3 weeks for 21 months. The 8-mg dose later was reduced to 4 mg (8/4-mg group). The primary efficacy endpoint was the percentage of patients at 21 months with >/= 1 skeletal-related event (SRE) (pathologic fracture, spinal cord compression, radiation therapy to bone, or surgery to bone). Secondary analyses (time to first SRE, annual incidence of SREs, and multiple-event analysis) included hypercalcemia of malignancy. RESULTS: Fewer patients treated with zoledronic acid developed at least 1 SRE at 21 months compared with patients treated with placebo (39% of those treated at the 4-mg dose [P =0.127] and 36% of those treated at the 8/4-mg dose [P = 0.023], compared with 46% of those treated with placebo). Furthermore, 4 mg of zoledronic acid significantly delayed the median time to first SRE (236 days with 4 mg vs. 155 days with placebo; P = 0.009) and significantly reduced the annual incidence of SREs (1.74 per year with the 4-mg dose vs. 2.71 per year with placebo; P = 0.012). Moreover, the 4-mg dose of zoledronic acid was found to reduce the risk of developing a skeletal event by 31% (hazard ratio of 0.693; P = 0.003). Zoledronic acid was found to be well tolerated with long-term use; the most commonly reported adverse events in all treatment groups included bone pain and the transient, acute-phase reactions of nausea, anemia, and emesis. CONCLUSIONS: To the authors' knowledge, zoledronic acid is the first bisphosphonate to demonstrate long-term safety and efficacy in this patient population.

Zoledronic acid versus placebo in the treatment of skeletal metastases in patients with lung cancer and other solid tumors: a phase III, double-blind, randomized trial--the Zoledronic Acid Lung Cancer and Other Solid Tumors Study Group.

PURPOSE: To assess the efficacy and safety of zoledronic acid in patients with bone metastases secondary to solid tumors other than breast or prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive zoledronic acid (4 or 8 mg) or placebo every 3 weeks for 9 months, with concomitant antineoplastic therapy. The 8-mg dose was reduced to 4 mg (8/4-mg group). The primary efficacy analysis was proportion of patients with at least one skeletal-related event (SRE), defined as pathologic fracture, spinal cord compression, radiation therapy to bone, and surgery to bone. Secondary analyses (time to first SRE, skeletal morbidity rate, and multiple event analysis) counted hypercalcemia as an SRE. RESULTS: Among 773 patients with bone metastases from lung cancer or other solid tumors, the proportion with an SRE was reduced in both zoledronic acid groups compared with the placebo group (38% for 4 mg and 35% for 8/4 mg zoledronic acid v 44% for the placebo group; P =.127 and P =.023 for 4-mg and 8/4-mg groups, respectively). Additionally, 4 mg zoledronic acid significantly increased time to first event (median, 230 v 163 days for placebo; P =.023), an important end point in this poor-prognosis population, and significantly reduced the risk of developing skeletal events by multiple event analysis (hazard ratio = 0.732; P =.017). Zoledronic acid was well tolerated; the most common adverse events in all treatment groups included bone pain, nausea, anemia, and vomiting. CONCLUSION: Zoledronic acid (4 mg infused over 15 minutes) is the first bisphosphonate to reduce skeletal complications in patients with bone metastases from solid tumors other than breast and prostate cancer.