A Randomized Multi-institutional Phase II Trial of Everolimus as Adjuvant Therapy in Patients with Locally Advanced Squamous Cell Cancer of the Head and Neck.

PURPOSE: Investigate whether adjuvant everolimus, an mTOR inhibitor, improves progression-free survival (PFS) in advanced-stage head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) and provide outcomes related to correlative biological factors associated with disease control. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized, double-blind phase II trial of patients with advanced-stage HNSCC from 13 institutions who were confirmed disease-free post-definitive therapy and enrolled between December 2010 and March 2015. Patients received adjuvant everolimus or placebo daily (10 mg, oral) for a maximum of 1 year. p16 IHC as a surrogate marker for human papillomavirus infection and whole-exome sequencing were performed. Cox proportional hazard models estimated hazard rates. Log-rank tests evaluated differences in survival. The primary endpoint was PFS. Secondary endpoints and objectives included overall survival (OS) and toxicity assessment. RESULTS: 52 patients [median (range) age, 58 (37-76) years; 43 men (83%), 9 women (17%)] were randomized to placebo (n = 24) or everolimus (n = 28). PFS favored everolimus, but was not significant [log-rank P = 0.093; HR = 0.44; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.17-1.17]. There was no difference in OS (P = 0.29; HR = 0.57; 95% CI, 0.20-16.2). Everolimus resulted in significant improvement in PFS for p16-negative patients (n = 31; P = 0.031; HR = 0.26; 95% CI, 0.07-0.97), although subgroup analysis showed no difference for p16-positive patients (n = 21; P = 0.93). Further, PFS was significantly higher in TP53-mutated (TP53mut) patients treated with everolimus compared with placebo (log-rank P = 0.027; HR = 0.24; 95% CI, 0.06-0.95). No treatment difference was seen in patients with TP53 wild-type tumors (P = 0.79). CONCLUSIONS: p16-negative and TP53mut patients may benefit from adjuvant treatment with everolimus.

Efficacy and safety of dilpacimab (ABT-165) versus bevacizumab plus FOLFIRI in metastatic colorectal cancer: a phase II study.

Aim: This phase II study investigated safety and efficacy of dilpacimab or bevacizumab plus FOLFIRI in patients with previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Materials & methods: Overall, 66 patients were treated (n = 34 dilpacimab + FOLFIRI; n = 32 bevacizumab + FOLFIRI). Progression-free survival, overall survival, response rates and tolerability were assessed. Results: Median progression-free survival for dilpacimab + FOLFIRI compared with bevacizumab + FOLFIRI was 3.78 months (95% CI: 2.07-7.20) versus 7.36 months (95% CI: 5.68-10.55) (hazard ratio: 3.57; 95% CI: 1.57-8.11; stratified). Median overall survival: 7.95 months for dilpacimab + FOLFIRI; not reached for bevacizumab + FOLFIRI. Objective response rates: 5.6% for dilpacimab + FOLFIRI and 14.7% for bevacizumab + FOLFIRI. Patients treated with dilpacimab + FOLFIRI experienced serious treatment-related adverse events (n = 4; 11.8%), including one case of intestinal perforation leading to death; none were reported for bevacizumab + FOLFIRI. Conclusion: Treatment with dilpacimab + FOLFIRI was not well tolerated and did not provide clinical benefit to patients with mCRC compared with bevacizumab + FOLFIRI. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03368859 (Clinicaltrials.gov).

Venetoclax plus bendamustine-rituximab or bendamustine-obinutuzumab in chronic lymphocytic leukemia: final results of a phase 1b study (GO28440).

Venetoclax (Ven), an orally administered, potent BCL-2 inhibitor, has demonstrated efficacy in chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) in combination with rituximab (R) or obinutuzumab (G). Our aim was to investigate the addition of bendamustine (B) to these Ven-containing regimens in relapsed/refractory (R/R) or first-line (1L) CLL. This multi-arm, non-randomized, open-label, phase 1b study was designed to evaluate the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and safety/tolerability of Ven with BR/BG, with 3+3 dose-escalation followed by safety expansion. Patients received Ven (schedule A) or BR/BG first (schedule B) to compare safety and determine dose/schedule for expansion. Six Ven-BR/-BG cycles were to be administered, then Ven monotherapy until disease progression (R/R) or fixed-duration 1-year treatment (1L). Overall, 33 R/R and 50 1L patients were enrolled. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed (doses 100-400-mg), and the MTD was not reached. Safety was similar between schedules; no tumour lysis syndrome (TLS) occurred during dose-finding. Schedule B and Ven 400-mg were chosen for expansion. The most frequent grade 3-4 toxicity was neutropenia: R/R 64%, 1L Ven-BR 85%, 1L Ven-BG 55%. Grade 3-4 infection rate was: R/R 27%, 1L Ven-BR 0%, 1L Ven-BG 27%. During expansion, one clinical and two laboratory TLS cases occurred. Fewer than half the patients completed six combination therapy cycles with all study drugs; rates of bendamustine discontinuation were high. Overall response rate was 91% in R/R and 100% in 1L patients (16/49 1L patients received Ven for >1 year). In conclusion, addition of bendamustine to Ven-R/-G increased toxicity without apparent efficacy benefit.

A prospective trial of stereotactic body radiation therapy for unresectable pancreatic cancer testing ablative doses.

BACKGROUND: We explored the safety and efficacy of ablative doses of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for unresectable pancreatic cancer. METHODS: This phase I/II trial included patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer previously treated with any number of cycles of induction chemotherapy. Patients were enrolled according to a 3+3 dose escalation design at 10, 12.5, and 15 Gy ×3, with subsequent patients at the maximally tolerated dose (MTD). Treatment was delivered to gross tumor delineated with MRI fusion using image-guidance to fiducial markers. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was defined as grade 3+ toxicity within 30 days. Secondary endpoints included late gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity, freedom from local failure (FFLF), and survival. RESULTS: Fifteen patients received a median 10 cycles of chemotherapy. There were no DLTs, and the MTD was 15 Gy ×3. Thirty-day toxicity included grade 2 nausea (46%) and grade 2 diarrhea (7%). Median survival after SBRT was 12.8 months (23 months after diagnosis) and median relapse-free survival was 7 months. At 1-year, FFLF was 80%. Four patients had grade 3+ GI bleeding after 30 days (median 6 months). Grade 3+ GI bleeding was associated with tumor volume (P=0.01), heterogeneity of dose within the planning target volume (PTV) (V120, P=0.03), and duodenal dose (V26-30 Gy, P<0.2). CONCLUSIONS: This aggressive SBRT regimen demonstrated limited 30-day morbidity, a moderate degree of local control, and a moderate risk for late GI bleeding. Further work is necessary to define the most appropriate hypofractionated radiation therapy (RT) regimen in the ablative dose range.

Clinical Assessment of 5-Fluorouracil/Leucovorin, Nab-Paclitaxel, and Irinotecan (FOLFIRABRAX) in Untreated Patients with Gastrointestinal Cancer Using UGT1A1 Genotype-Guided Dosing.

PURPOSE: 5-Fluorouracil (5-FU)/leucovorin, irinotecan, and nab-paclitaxel are all active agents in gastrointestinal cancers; the combination, FOLFIRABRAX, has not been previously evaluated. UDP Glucuronosyltransferase 1A1 (UGT1A1) clears SN-38, the active metabolite of irinotecan. UGT1A1*28 polymorphism reduces UGT1A1 enzymatic activity and predisposes to toxicity. We performed a trial to assess the safety and tolerability of FOLFIRABRAX with UGT1A1 genotype-guided dosing of irinotecan. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with previously untreated, advanced gastrointestinal cancers received FOLFIRABRAX with prophylactic pegfilgrastim every 14 days. UGT1A1 *1/*1, *1/*28, and *28/*28 patients received initial irinotecan doses of 180, 135, and 90 mg/m2, respectively. 5-FU 2,400 mg/m2 over 46 hours, leucovorin 400 mg/m2, and nab-paclitaxel 125 mg/m2 were administered. Doses were deemed tolerable if the dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) rate during cycle 1 was ≤35% in each genotype group. DLTs were monitored using a sequential procedure. RESULTS: Fifty patients enrolled, 30 pancreatic, 9 biliary tract, 6 gastroesophageal, and 5 others. DLTs occurred in 5 of 23 (22%) *1/*1 patients, 1 of 19 (5%) *1/*28 patients, and 0 of 7 *28/*28 patients. DLTs were all grade 3: diarrhea (3 patients), nausea (2 patients), and febrile neutropenia (1 patient). The overall response rate was 31%. Response rates in pancreatic, gastroesophageal, and biliary tract cancers were 34%, 50%, and 11%, respectively. Eighteen patients (36%) received therapy for at least 24 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: FOLFIRABRAX with genotype-guided dosing of irinotecan is tolerable in patients with advanced gastrointestinal cancer and UGT1A1*1*1 or UGT1A1*1*28 genotypes. Too few *28/*28 patients were enrolled to provide conclusive results. Responses occurred across multiple tumor types.

Atezolizumab with or without cobimetinib versus regorafenib in previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer (IMblaze370): a multicentre, open-label, phase 3, randomised, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Microsatellite-stable metastatic colorectal cancer is typically unresponsive to immunotherapy. This phase 3 study was designed to assess atezolizumab plus cobimetinib in metastatic colorectal cancer. Here, we report the comparison of atezolizumab plus cobimetinib or atezolizumab monotherapy versus regorafenib in the third-line setting. METHODS: IMblaze 370 is a multicentre, open-label, phase 3, randomised, controlled trial, done at 73 academic medical centres and community oncology practices in 11 countries. Patients aged at least 18 years with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer, baseline Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, and disease progression on or intolerance to at least two previous systemic chemotherapy regimens were enrolled. We used permuted-block randomisation (block size four) to assign patients (2:1:1) via an interactive voice and web response system to atezolizumab (840 mg intravenously every 2 weeks) plus cobimetinib (60 mg orally once daily for days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle), atezolizumab monotherapy (1200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks), or regorafenib (160 mg orally once daily for days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle). Stratification factors were extended RAS status (wild-type vs mutant) and time since diagnosis of first metastasis (<18 months vs ≥18 months). Recruitment of patients with high microsatellite instability was capped at 5%. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in the population of patients who received at least one dose of their assigned treatment. IMblaze370 is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02788279. FINDINGS: Between July 27, 2016, and Jan 19, 2017, 363 patients were enrolled (183 patients in the atezolizumab plus cobimetinib group, 90 in the atezolizumab group, and 90 in the regorafenib group). At data cutoff (March 9, 2018), median follow-up was 7·3 months (IQR 3·7-13·6). Median overall survival was 8·87 months (95% CI 7·00-10·61) with atezolizumab plus cobimetinib, 7·10 months (6·05-10·05) with atezolizumab, and 8·51 months (6·41-10·71) with regorafenib; the hazard ratio was 1·00 (95% CI 0·73-1·38; p=0·99) for the combination versus regorafenib and 1·19 (0·83-1·71; p=0·34) for atezolizumab versus regorafenib. Grade 3-4 adverse events were reported in 109 (61%) of 179 patients in the atezolizumab plus cobimetinib group, 28 (31%) of 90 in the atezolizumab group, and 46 (58%) of 80 in the regorafenib group. The most common all-cause grade 3-4 adverse events in the combination group were diarrhoea (20 [11%] of 179), anaemia (ten [6%]), increased blood creatine phosphokinase (12 [7%]), and fatigue (eight [4%]). Serious adverse events were reported in 71 (40%) of 179 patients in the combination group, 15 (17%) of 90 in the atezolizumab group, and 18 (23%) of 80 in the regorafenib group. Two treatment-related deaths occurred in the combination group (sepsis) and one in the regorafenib group (intestinal perforation). INTERPRETATION: IMblaze370 did not meet its primary endpoint of improved overall survival with atezolizumab plus cobimetinib or atezolizumab versus regorafenib. The safety of atezolizumab plus cobimetinib was consistent with those of the individual drugs. These results underscore the challenge of expanding the benefit of immunotherapy to patients whose tumours have lower baseline levels of immune inflammation, such as those with microsatellite-stable metastatic colorectal cancer. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd/Genentech Inc.

TGFß receptor inhibitor galunisertib is linked to inflammation- and remodeling-related proteins in patients with pancreatic cancer.

PURPOSE: Galunisertib, the first small molecule transforming growth factor beta (TGFß) receptor inhibitor, plus gemcitabine resulted in the improvement of survival in patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer, but markers to identify patients likely to respond are lacking. METHODS: In the Phase 1b/2 JBAJ study, 156 patients were randomized 2:1 to galunisertib + gemcitabine (N = 104) or placebo + gemcitabine (N = 52). Clinical outcome data were integrated with baseline markers and pharmacodynamic markers while patients were on treatment, including circulating proteins using a multi-analyte panel, T cell subset evaluation, and miRNA profiling. RESULTS: Baseline biomarkers associated with overall prognosis regardless of treatment included CA19-9 and TGF-ß1. In addition, IP-10, FSH, MIP-1α, and PAI-1 were potential predictive proteins. Baseline proteins that were changed during treatment included amphiregulin, CA15-3, cathepsin D, P-selectin, RAGE, sortilin, COMP, eotaxin-2, N-BNP, osteopontin, and thrombospondin-4. Plasma miRNA with potential prognostic value included miR-21-5p, miR-301a-3p, miR-210-3p, and miR-141-3p, while those with potential predictive value included miR-424-5p, miR-483-3p, and miR-10b-5p. CONCLUSIONS: Galunisertib + gemcitabine resulted in improvement of overall survival, and 4 proteins (IP-10, FSH, MIP-1α, PAI-1) were potentially predictive for this combination treatment. Future studies should also include baseline evaluation of miR-424-5p, miR-483-3p, and miR-10b-5p. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01373164.

A UGT1A1 genotype-guided dosing study of modified FOLFIRINOX in previously untreated patients with advanced gastrointestinal malignancies.

BACKGROUND: FOLFIRINOX (5-fluorouracil [5-FU], leucovorin, irinotecan, oxaliplatin) is an effective but toxic therapy for pancreatic cancer. UGT1A1 (UDP glucuronosyltransferase 1A1) eliminates the active metabolite of irinotecan. Polymorphisms reduce UGT1A1 activity, leading to toxicity. The primary objective was to determine the dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) rate in cycle 1 of modified FOLFIRINOX (mFOLFIRINOX) using genotype-guided dosing of irinotecan for the most common UGT1A1 genotypes (*1/*1, *1/*28) in advanced gastrointestinal malignancies, with expansion in pancreatic and biliary tract cancers. METHOD: 5-FU (2400 mg/m2 over 46 hours), leucovorin (400 mg/m2 ), oxaliplatin (85 mg/m2 ), and irinotecan were given every 14 days. Irinotecan doses of 180, 135, and 90 mg/m2 were administered for UGT1A1 genotypes *1/*1, *1/*28, and *28/*28, respectively. Prophylactic pegfilgrastim was omitted in cycle 1 for cohort 1 (tolerability by genotype), but was given in cohort 2 (tolerability by tumor type). Doses were tolerable if the upper limit of a 2-sided 80% confidence interval for DLT rate was ≤33%. RESULTS: In cohort 1, DLTs (most commonly febrile neutropenia, fatigue, diarrhea) occurred in 2/15 (13%), 3/16 (19%), and 4/10 (40%) patients with *1/*1, *1/*28, and *28/*28 genotypes, respectively. In cohort 2, 6/19 (32%) pancreatic and 4/19 (21%) biliary tract cancer patients experienced DLTs (most commonly fatigue, diarrhea, nausea/vomiting). In cohort 2, upper confidence limits of DLT rates exceeded 33%. Response rates were 38% in pancreatic and 21% in biliary tract cancers. CONCLUSION: On the basis of our prespecified criteria, tolerability of UGT1A1 genotype-guided mFOLFIRINOX was not established in pancreatic and biliary tract cancers. However, this regimen was effective.

Galunisertib plus gemcitabine vs. gemcitabine for first-line treatment of patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: Galunisertib is the first-in-class, first-in-human, oral small-molecule type I transforming growth factor-beta receptor (ALK5) serine/threonine kinase inhibitor to enter clinical development. The effect of galunisertib vs. placebo in patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer was determined. METHODS: This was a two-part, multinational study: phase 1b was a non-randomised, open-label, multicentre, and dose-escalation study; phase 2 was a randomised, placebo- and Bayesian-augmented controlled, double-blind study in patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma considered candidates for first-line chemotherapy with gemcitabine. Patients were randomised 2:1 to galunisertib-gemcitabine (N = 104) or placebo-gemcitabine (N = 52). Gemcitabine dose was 1000 mg/m2 QW. Primary endpoints for phases 1b and 2, respectively, were phase 2 dose and overall survival. Secondary objectives included tolerability and biomarkers. RESULTS: Dose-escalation suggested a 300-mg/day dose. Primary objective was met: median survival times were 8.9 and 7.1 months for galunisertib and placebo, respectively (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.79 [95% credible interval: 0.59-1.09] and posterior probability HR < 1 = 0.93). Lower baseline biomarkers macrophage inflammatory protein-1-alpha and interferon-gamma-induced protein 10 were associated with galunisertib benefit. CONCLUSIONS: Galunisertib-gemcitabine combination improved overall survival vs. gemcitabine in patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer, with minimal added toxicity. Future exploration of galunisertib in pancreatic cancer is ongoing in combination with durvalumab.

Prospective International Randomized Phase II Study of Low-Dose Abiraterone With Food Versus Standard Dose Abiraterone In Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

Purpose Abiraterone acetate (AA) is a standard of care for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). Despite a large food effect, AA was administered under fasting conditions in its pivotal trials. We sought to test the hypothesis that low-dose AA (LOW; 250 mg with a low-fat meal) would have comparable activity to standard AA (STD; 1,000 mg fasting) in patients with CRPC. Patients and Methods Patients (n = 72) with progressive CRPC from seven institutions in the United States and Singapore were randomly assigned to STD or LOW. Both arms received prednisone 5 mg twice daily. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) was assessed monthly, and testosterone/dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate were assessed every 12 weeks with disease burden radiographic assessments. Plasma was collected for drug concentrations. Log change in PSA, as a pharmacodynamic biomarker for efficacy, was the primary end point, using a noninferiority design. Progression-free survival (PFS), PSA response (≥ 50% reduction), change in androgen levels, and pharmacokinetics were secondary end points. Results Thirty-six patients were accrued to both arms. At 12 weeks, there was a greater effect on PSA in the LOW arm (mean log change, -1.59) compared with STD (-1.19), and noninferiority of LOW was established according to predefined criteria. The PSA response rate was 58% in LOW and 50% in STD, and the median PFS was approximately 9 months in both groups. Androgen levels decreased similarly in both arms. Although there was no difference in PSA response or PFS, abiraterone concentrations were higher in STD. Conclusion Low-dose AA (with low-fat breakfast) is noninferior to standard dosing with respect to PSA metrics. Given the pharmacoeconomic implications, these data warrant consideration by prescribers, payers, and patients. Additional studies are indicated to assess the long-term efficacy of this approach.

Clinical and molecular features of innate and acquired resistance to anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy in lung cancer.

HYPOTHESIS: The majority of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients treated with anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy develop either innate or acquired resistance. Across tumor types, the "T cell-inflamed" tumor microenvironment correlates with clinical response to immunotherapy. We hypothesize that clinical characteristics may be predictive of resistance and that "T cell-inflamed" NSCLC tumors can be identified by gene expression profiling. RESULTS: Of 93 patients, 36 (38.7%) had innate resistance and 57 (61.3%) had initial benefit to immunotherapy. Innate resistance was associated with non-smokers (p = 0.013), more involved disease sites (p = 0.011), more prior therapy (p = 0.001), and a lower albumin level (p = 0.014). Among patients with initial benefit, factors associated with subsequent progression-free survival included higher Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) (p = 0.004) and lower depth of response to anti-PD-1 therapy (p = 0.003). A "T cell-inflamed" microenvironment was identified in 42% of TCGA adenocarcinoma samples versus 21.0% of squamous cell. DISCUSSION: Specific clinical characteristics appear to be predictive of either innate or acquired resistance to anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy. A "T cell-inflamed" tumor was more common in adenocarcinoma than squamous histology. METHODS: A retrospective review of NSCLC patients treated with anti-PD-1/PD-L1 monotherapy. Patients with innate resistance to anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy (defined as progression at first CT evaluation) were compared to patients with initial clinical benefit. Among those with initial clinical benefit, we identified prognostic factors for time to progression (acquired resistance) or death. To further corroborate our findings on limited numbers, immune gene expression profiling of all NSCLC samples from the TCGA database was also pursued.

Primary systemic therapy in resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma using mFOLFIRINOX: A pilot study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Surgery followed by gemcitabine and/or a fluoropyrimidine is standard therapy for resectable PDAC. mFOLFIRINOX (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2 , irinotecan 180 mg/m2 , leucovorin 400 mg/m2 Day 1, 5-FU 2400 mg/m2 × 48 h IV, peg-filgrastim 6 mg SQ day 3, every 14 days) has substantial activity in metastatic PDAC. We wished to determine the tolerability/efficacy of peri-operative mFOLFIRINOX in resectable PDAC. METHODS: Patients with resectable PDAC (ECOG PS 0/1) received four cycles of mFOLFIRINOX pre- and post-surgery. The primary endpoint was completion of preoperative chemotherapy plus resection. Secondary endpoints included completion of all therapy, R0 resection, treatment related toxicity, PFS, and OS. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients enrolled: median age 62 (47-78); 20/21 (95%) completed four cycles of preoperative mFOLFIRINOX; response by RECIST was 1 CR, 3 PR, 16 SD; 17/21 (81%) completed resection, 16/21 (76%) R0; 14/21 (66%) completed four cycles of postoperative mFOLFIRINOX. Grade 3 and 4 toxicity occurred in 23% and 14% patients pre-operatively, 26% and 6.0% post-operatively. Nine patients are alive with median follow-up of 27.7 (3.1-47.1) months. CONCLUSIONS: PST using mFOLFIRINOX in resectable PDAC is feasible and tolerable. R0 resection rate is high and survival promising, requiring longer follow-up and larger studies for definitive assessment.

A Phase II Randomized Trial (GO27827) of First-Line FOLFOX Plus Bevacizumab with or Without the MET Inhibitor Onartuzumab in Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Dysregulated hepatocyte growth factor/mesenchymal-epithelial transition (MET) signaling is associated with poor prognosis and resistance to vascular endothelial growth factor inhibition in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We report outcomes from a double-blind, multicenter phase II trial of the MET inhibitor onartuzumab in combination with mFOLFOX-6 and bevacizumab for mCRC (GO27827; NCT01418222). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive onartuzumab (10 mg/kg intravenously [IV]) or placebo plus mFOLFOX-6 and bevacizumab (5 mg/kg IV). Oxaliplatin was given for 8-12 cycles; other agents were continued until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or death. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) in the intent-to-treat (ITT) and MET immunohistochemistry (IHC) expression-positive populations. RESULTS: Between September 2011 and November 2012, 194 patients were enrolled. In September 2013, an interim analysis recommended stopping onartuzumab treatment due to lack of efficacy. At the time of the final analysis in February 2014, no significant improvement in PFS was seen with onartuzumab versus placebo in either the ITT or MET IHC-positive populations. An improvement in PFS was noted in the MET IHC-negative population. Neither overall survival nor response rate was improved with onartuzumab. The incidence of fatigue, peripheral edema, and deep vein thrombosis was increased with onartuzumab relative to placebo. CONCLUSION: Onartuzumab combined with mFOLFOX-6 and bevacizumab did not significantly improve efficacy outcomes in either the ITT or MET IHC-positive populations. MET expression by IHC was not a predictive biomarker in this setting. The Oncologist 2017;22:264-271 IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The addition of onartuzumab to mFOLFOX-6 plus bevacizumab did not improve outcomes in patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer in this randomized, phase II study. Although initial results with onartuzumab were promising, a number of phase II/III clinical trials have reported a lack of improvement in efficacy with onartuzumab combined with standard-of-care therapies in several tumor types. Furthermore, negative study data have been published for rilotumumab and ficlatuzumab, both of which block hepatocyte growth factor binding to the mesenchymal-epithelial transition (MET) receptor. MET immunohistochemistry was not a predictive biomarker. It remains to be seen if other biomarkers or small molecule inhibitors may be more appropriate for inhibiting this oncogenic pathway.

Real-world clinical experience in the Connect® chronic lymphocytic leukaemia registry: a prospective cohort study of 1494 patients across 199 US centres.

The clinical course of chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) is heterogeneous, and treatment options vary considerably. The Connect® CLL registry is a multicentre, prospective observational cohort study that provides a real-world perspective on the management of, and outcomes for, patients with CLL. Between 2010 and 2014, 1494 patients with CLL and that initiated therapy, were enrolled from 199 centres throughout the USA (179 community-, 17 academic-, and 3 government-based centres). Patients were grouped by line of therapy at enrolment (LOT). We describe the clinical and demographic characteristics of, and practice patterns for, patients with CLL enrolled in this treatment registry, providing patient-level observational data that represent real-world experiences in the USA. Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) analyses were performed on 49·3% of patients at enrolment. The most common genetic abnormalities detected by FISH were del(13q) and trisomy 12 (45·7% and 20·8%, respectively). Differences in disease characteristics and comorbidities were observed between patients enrolled in LOT1 and combined LOT2/≥3 cohorts. Important trends observed include the infrequent use of genetic prognostic testing, and differences in patient characteristics for patients receiving chemoimmunotherapy combinations. These data represent experiences of patients with CLL in the USA, which may inform treatment decisions in everyday practice.

Randomized Phase Ib/II Study of Gemcitabine Plus Placebo or Vismodegib, a Hedgehog Pathway Inhibitor, in Patients With Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer.

PURPOSE: Sonic hedgehog (SHH), an activating ligand of smoothened (SMO), is overexpressed in > 70% of pancreatic cancers (PCs). We investigated the impact of vismodegib, an SHH antagonist, plus gemcitabine (GV) or gemcitabine plus placebo (GP) in a multicenter phase Ib/randomized phase II trial and preclinical PC models. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with PC not amenable to curative therapy who had received no prior therapy for metastatic disease and had Karnofsky performance score ≥ 80 were enrolled. Patients were randomly assigned in a one-to-one ratio to GV or GP. The primary end point was progression-free-survival (PFS). Exploratory correlative studies included serial SHH serum levels and contrast perfusion computed tomography imaging. To further investigate putative biologic mechanisms of SMO inhibition, two autochthonous pancreatic cancer models (Kras(G12D); p16/p19(fl/fl); Pdx1-Cre and Kras(G12D); p53(R270H/wt); Pdx1-Cre) were studied. RESULTS: No safety issues were identified in the phase Ib portion (n = 7), and the phase II study enrolled 106 evaluable patients (n = 53 in each arm). Median PFS was 4.0 and 2.5 months for GV and GP arms, respectively (95% CI, 2.5 to 5.3 and 1.9 to 3.8, respectively; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.54 to 1.21; P = .30). Median overall survival (OS) was 6.9 and 6.1 months for GV and GP arms, respectively (95% CI, 5.8 to 8.0 and 5.0 to 8.0, respectively; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.69 to 1.58; P = .84). Response rates were not significantly different. There were no significant associations between correlative markers and overall response rate, PFS, or OS. Preclinical trials revealed no significant differences with vismodegib in drug delivery, tumor growth rate, or OS in either model. CONCLUSION: The addition of vismodegib to gemcitabine in an unselected cohort did not improve overall response rate, PFS, or OS in patients with metastatic PC. Our preclinical and clinical results revealed no statistically significant differences with respect to drug delivery or treatment efficacy using vismodegib.

Bevacizumab exposure beyond first disease progression in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: analyses of the ARIES observational cohort study.

PURPOSE: This analysis from Avastin® Registries: Investigation of Effectiveness and Safety (ARIES) examined the association between exposure to bevacizumab after disease progression (PD) and postprogression survival (PPS) in bevacizumab-exposed metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) through the application of time-dependent and time-fixed analytical methods. METHODS: Patients with mCRC who were treated with first-line bevacizumab and who survived first PD (PD1) were included. A time-dependent Cox regression model was fitted to assess the effect of cumulative bevacizumab exposure on PPS, while controlling for potential confounders. In addition to support findings from previous studies, a modified intent-to-treat (mITT) analysis compared PPS in patients who received bevacizumab beyond disease progression (BBP) with those who did not (No-BBP). RESULTS: Of 1550 patients, 1199 survived PD1 and had a median PPS of 13.4 months. Cumulative bevacizumab exposure was associated with improved PPS (p = 0.0040). After adjusting for confounders, the hazard ratios (HRs) for PPS decreased, on average, by 1.2% (range, 1.1-1.3%) with each additional dose of bevacizumab. In the mITT analysis, the median PPS for BBP (n = 438) was 14.4 months vs 10.6 months with for No-BBP (n = 667). BBP was found to be independently associated with longer PPS in a multivariable Cox regression analysis (HR, 0.84; 95% confidence interval, 0.73-0.97). Protocol-specified adverse events suspected to be associated with bevacizumab occurred in 13.0% of patients with BBP. CONCLUSION: This analysis supports the observation that bevacizumab exposure after PD1 is associated with longer PPS in mCRC.

Phase I study of capecitabine, oxaliplatin, bevacizumab, and everolimus in advanced solid tumors.

PURPOSE: To define maximum tolerated dose (MTD), toxicities, and pharmacodynamics of capecitabine, oxaliplatin, bevacizumab, and everolimus in advanced solid tumor patients. DESIGN: This was a standard "3 + 3" dose-escalation trial. All subjects received bevacizumab 7.5 mg/kg on day 1 of each cycle. Doses for capecitabine, oxaliplatin and everolimus were modified per dose limiting toxicity (DLT). Baseline and on-treatment plasma biomarkers were analyzed. Archived tumor mRNA levels were evaluated for NRP1, NRP2 and VEGF-A isoforms. RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients were evaluable for toxicity and 30 for efficacy. Two DLTs were observed in cohort 1 and one DLT each was observed in cohort -1 and -1b. Grade ≥3 toxicities included neutropenia, hypertension, perforation/fistula/hemorrhage, hypertriglyceridemia, diarrhea, and thromboembolism. Twelve subjects experienced partial response (PR); 12 had stable disease as best response. Three of seven chemorefractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) subjects experienced PR; 8 of 15 chemonaive mCRC subjects experienced PR. Plasma TßRIII and IL-6 increased on treatment but without correlation to outcome. Increased VEGF165 levels significantly correlated with longer progression free survival. CONCLUSIONS: Everolimus with full dose capecitabine, oxaliplatin, and bevacizumab had unacceptable toxicity. MTD was: everolimus 5 mg daily; capecitabine 680 mg/m(2) BID days 1-14; oxaliplatin 100 mg/m(2) and bevacizumab 7.5 mg/kg, day 1. Activity was noted in mCRC.

Sunitinib in combination with trastuzumab for the treatment of advanced breast cancer: activity and safety results from a phase II study.

BACKGROUND: This phase II study evaluated the efficacy and safety/tolerability of sunitinib plus trastuzumab in patients with HER2-positive advanced breast cancer (ABC). METHODS: Eligible patients received sunitinib 37.5 mg/day and trastuzumab administered either weekly (loading, 4 mg/kg; then weekly 2 mg/kg) or 3-weekly (loading, 8 mg/kg; then 3-weekly 6 mg/kg). Prior trastuzumab and/or lapatinib treatment were permitted. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). RESULTS: Sixty patients were enrolled and evaluable for safety; 57 were evaluable for efficacy. The majority of patients (58%) had received no prior chemotherapy in the metastatic setting. The ORR was 37%; the clinical benefit rate (CBR; percent objective response plus stable disease ≥ 24 weeks) was 56%. Among patients who were treatment-naïve or had received only adjuvant therapy, the ORR was 44% and the CBR was 59%. Overall, median overall survival had not been reached and the 1-year survival rate was 91%. The majority of adverse events (AEs) were mild to moderate in severity. Forty percent of patients experienced AEs related to measured left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) declines, which occurred more frequently in patients who had received prior anthracycline treatment. Ten percent of patients exhibited symptoms related to LVEF declines. One patient died on study from cardiogenic shock. Antitumor response and several safety parameters appeared to correlate with sunitinib exposure. CONCLUSIONS: Sunitinib plus trastuzumab demonstrated antitumor activity in patients with HER2-positive ABC, particularly those who were treatment-naïve or had only received prior adjuvant treatment. Sunitinib plus trastuzumab had acceptable safety and tolerability in patients with HER2-positive ABC who had not received prior anthracycline therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00243503.

Evaluation of a novel rash scale and a serum proteomic predictor in a randomized phase II trial of sequential or concurrent cetuximab and pemetrexed in previously treated non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Candidate predictive biomarkers for epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors (EGFRi), skin rash and serum proteomic assays, require further qualification to improve EGFRi therapy in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In a phase II trial that was closed to accrual because of changes in clinical practice we examined the relationships among candidate biomarkers, quantitative changes in tumor size, progression-free and overall survival. METHODS: 55 patients with progressive NSCLC after platinum therapy were randomized to receive (Arm A) cetuximab, followed by pemetrexed at progression, or (Arm B) concurrent cetuximab and pemetrexed. All received cetuximab monotherapy for the first 14 days. Pre-treatment serum and weekly rash assessments by standard and EGFRi-induced rash (EIR) scales were collected. RESULTS: 43 patients (20-Arm A, 23-Arm B) completed the 14-day run-in. Median survival was 9.1 months. Arm B had better median overall (Arm B = 10.3 [95% CI 7.5, 16.8]; Arm A = 3.5 [2.8, 11.7] months P = 0.046) and progression-free survival (Arm B = 2.3 [1.6, 3.1]; Arm A = 1.6 [0.9, 1.9] months P = 0.11). The EIR scale distributed ratings among 6 rather than 3 categories but ordinal scale rash severity did not predict outcomes. The serum proteomic classifier and absence of rash after 21 days of cetuximab did. CONCLUSIONS: Absence of rash after 21 days of cetuximab therapy and the serum proteomic classifier, but not ordinal rash severity, were associated with NSCLC outcomes. Although in a small study, these observations were consistent with results from larger retrospective analyses.

TRAIL receptor agonist conatumumab with modified FOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab for first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: A randomized phase 1b/2 trial.

BACKGROUND: In patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), we conducted a phase 1b/randomized phase 2 trial to define the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab (mFOLFOX6/bev) with conatumumab, an investigational, fully human monoclonal IgG1 antibody that specifically activates death receptor 5 (DR5). METHODS: Twelve patients were enrolled in a phase 1b open-label dose-escalation trial of conatumumab with mFOLFOX6/bev; thereafter, 190 patients were randomized 1:1:1 to receive mFOLFOX6/bev in combination with 2 mg/kg conatumumab, 10 mg/kg conatumumab, or placebo. Therapy cycles were repeated every 2 weeks until disease progression or the occurrence of unacceptable toxicity. RESULTS: In phase 1b, conatumumab with mFOLFOX6/bev was tolerated without apparent added toxicity over mFOLFOX6/bev alone. In phase 2, conatumumab with mFOLFOX6/bev did not confer a benefit in progression-free survival when compared with placebo with mFOLFOX6/bev. Toxicity was similar in all treatment arms. Following treatment, similar increases in circulating caspase-3 levels were observed in all arms. CONCLUSIONS: Conatumumab with mFOLFOX6/bev did not offer improved efficacy over the same chemotherapy with placebo in first-line treatment of patients with mCRC. These data do not support further development of conatumumab in advanced CRC.