Everolimus in advanced, progressive, well-differentiated, non-functional neuroendocrine tumors: RADIANT-4 lung subgroup analysis.

In the phase III RADIANT-4 study, everolimus improved median progression-free survival (PFS) by 7.1 months in patients with advanced, progressive, well-differentiated (grade 1 or grade 2), non-functional lung or gastrointestinal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) vs placebo (hazard ratio, 0.48; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.35-0.67; P < .00001). This exploratory analysis reports the outcomes of the subgroup of patients with lung NETs. In RADIANT-4, patients were randomized (2:1) to everolimus 10 mg/d or placebo, both with best supportive care. This is a post hoc analysis of the lung subgroup with PFS, by central radiology review, as the primary endpoint; secondary endpoints included objective response rate and safety measures. Ninety of the 302 patients enrolled in the study had primary lung NET (everolimus, n = 63; placebo, n = 27). Median PFS (95% CI) by central review was 9.2 (6.8-10.9) months in the everolimus arm vs 3.6 (1.9-5.1) months in the placebo arm (hazard ratio, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.28-0.88). More patients who received everolimus (58%) experienced tumor shrinkage compared with placebo (13%). Most frequently reported (≥5% incidence) grade 3-4 drug-related adverse events (everolimus vs. placebo) included stomatitis (11% vs. 0%), hyperglycemia (10% vs. 0%), and any infections (8% vs. 0%). In patients with advanced, progressive, well-differentiated, non-functional lung NET, treatment with everolimus was associated with a median PFS improvement of 5.6 months, with a safety profile similar to that of the overall RADIANT-4 cohort. These results support the use of everolimus in patients with advanced, non-functional lung NET. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (no. NCT01524783).

Everolimus in Neuroendocrine Tumors of the Gastrointestinal Tract and Unknown Primary.

PURPOSE: The RADIANT-4 randomized phase 3 study demonstrated significant prolongation of median progression-free survival (PFS) with everolimus compared to placebo (11.0 [95% CI 9.2-13.3] vs. 3.9 [95% CI 3.6-7.4] months) in patients with advanced, progressive, nonfunctional gastrointestinal (GI) and lung neuroendocrine tumors (NET). This analysis specifically evaluated NET patients with GI and unknown primary origin. METHODS: Patients in the RADIANT-4 trial were randomized 2:1 to everolimus 10 mg/day or placebo. The effect of everolimus on PFS was evaluated in patients with NET of the GI tract or unknown primary site. RESULTS: Of the 302 patients enrolled, 175 had GI NET (everolimus, 118; placebo, 57) and 36 had unknown primary (everolimus, 23; placebo, 13). In the GI subset, the median PFS by central review was 13.1 months (95% CI 9.2-17.3) in the everolimus arm versus 5.4 months (95% CI 3.6-9.3) in the placebo arm; the hazard ratio (HR) was 0.56 (95% CI 0.37-0.84). In the unknown primary patients, the median PFS was 13.6 months (95% CI 4.1-not evaluable) for everolimus versus 7.5 months (95% CI 1.9-18.5) for placebo; the HR was 0.60 (95% CI 0.24-1.51). Everolimus efficacy was also demonstrated in both midgut and non-midgut populations; a 40-46% reduction in the risk of progression or death was reported for patients in the combined GI and unknown primary subgroup. Everolimus had a benefit regardless of prior somatostatin analog therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Everolimus showed a clinically meaningful PFS benefit in patients with advanced progressive nonfunctional NET of GI and unknown primary, consistent with the overall RADIANT-4 results, providing an effective new standard treatment option in this patient population and filling an unmet treatment need for these patients.

Health-related quality of life for everolimus versus placebo in patients with advanced, non-functional, well-differentiated gastrointestinal or lung neuroendocrine tumours (RADIANT-4): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: In the phase 3 RADIANT-4 trial, everolimus increased progression-free survival compared with placebo in patients with advanced, progressive, non-functional, well-differentiated gastrointestinal or lung neuroendocrine tumours (NETs). We now report the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) secondary endpoint. METHODS: RADIANT-4 is a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial done in 97 centres in 25 countries worldwide. Adults (aged ≥18 years) were eligible for the study if they had pathologically confirmed, advanced (unresectable or metastatic), non-functional, well-differentiated (grade 1 or 2) NETs of lung or gastrointestinal origin. Patients were randomly allocated (2:1) using block randomisation (block size of three) by an interactive voice response system to receive oral everolimus (10 mg per day) or placebo, both with best supportive care, with stratification by tumour origin, WHO performance status, and previous somatostatin analogue treatment. HRQOL was assessed with the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) questionnaire at baseline (visit 2, day 1), every 8 weeks (±â€ˆ1 week) during the study for the first 12 months after randomisation, and every 12 weeks thereafter until study drug discontinuation. The primary endpoint, reported previously, was progression-free survival assessed by central review; HRQOL was a prespecified secondary endpoint. The prespecified secondary outcome measure was time to definitive deterioration (≥7 points) in FACT-G total score. Analyses were done on the full analysis set, consisting of all randomised patients, by intention to treat. Only data obtained while receiving the randomly allocated treatment were included in this analysis. Enrolment for RADIANT-4 was completed on Aug 23, 2013, but the trial is ongoing pending final analysis of the key secondary endpoint of overall survival. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01524783. FINDINGS: Between April 3, 2012, and Aug 23, 2013, 302 patients were enrolled; 205 were randomly allocated everolimus and 97 were assigned placebo. At baseline, 193 (94%) of 205 patients assigned everolimus and 95 (98%) of 97 allocated placebo had completed either fully or partly the FACT-G questionnaire; at week 48, 70 (83%) of 84 patients assigned everolimus and 22 (85%) of 26 allocated placebo completed FACT-G. Median time to definitive deterioration in FACT-G total score was 11·27 months (95% CI 9·27-19·35) with everolimus and 9·23 months (5·52-not estimable) with placebo (adjusted hazard ratio 0·81, 95% CI 0·55-1·21; log-rank p=0·31). INTERPRETATION: HRQOL was maintained for patients with advanced, non-functional, gastrointestinal or lung NETs, with no relevant differences noted between the everolimus and placebo groups. In view of the previous RADIANT-4 findings of longer progression-free survival with everolimus, our findings suggest that everolimus delays disease progression while preserving overall HRQOL, even with the usual toxic effects related to active targeted drug treatment for cancer. FUNDING: Novartis Pharmaceuticals.

Adjuvant bevacizumab-containing therapy in triple-negative breast cancer (BEATRICE): primary results of a randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy improves progression-free survival in metastatic breast cancer and pathological complete response rates in the neoadjuvant setting. Micrometastases are dependent on angiogenesis, suggesting that patients might benefit from anti-angiogenic strategies in the adjuvant setting. We therefore assessed the addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy in the adjuvant setting for women with triple-negative breast cancer. METHODS: For this open-label, randomised phase 3 trial we recruited patients with centrally confirmed triple-negative operable primary invasive breast cancer from 360 sites in 37 countries. We randomly allocated patients aged 18 years or older (1:1 with block randomisation; stratified by nodal status, chemotherapy [with an anthracycline, taxane, or both], hormone receptor status [negative vs low], and type of surgery) to receive a minimum of four cycles of chemotherapy either alone or with bevacizumab (equivalent of 5 mg/kg every week for 1 year). The primary endpoint was invasive disease-free survival (IDFS). Efficacy analyses were based on the intention-to-treat population, safety analyses were done on all patients who received at least one dose of study drug, and plasma biomarker analyses were done on all treated patients consenting to biomarker analyses and providing a measurable baseline plasma sample. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00528567. FINDINGS: Between Dec 3, 2007, and March 8, 2010, we randomly assigned 1290 patients to receive chemotherapy alone and 1301 to receive bevacizumab plus chemotherapy. Most patients received anthracycline-containing therapy; 1638 (63%) of the 2591 patients had node-negative disease. At the time of analysis of IDFS, median follow-up was 31·5 months (IQR 25·6-36·8) in the chemotherapy-alone group and 32·0 months (27·5-36·9) in the bevacizumab group. At the time of the primary analysis, IDFS events had been reported in 205 patients (16%) in the chemotherapy-alone group and in 188 patients (14%) in the bevacizumab group (hazard ratio [HR] in stratified log-rank analysis 0·87, 95% CI 0·72-1·07; p=0·18). 3-year IDFS was 82·7% (95% CI 80·5-85·0) with chemotherapy alone and 83·7% (81·4-86·0) with bevacizumab and chemotherapy. After 200 deaths, no difference in overall survival was noted between the groups (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·64-1·12; p=0·23). Exploratory biomarker assessment suggests that patients with high pre-treatment plasma VEGFR-2 might benefit from the addition of bevacizumab (Cox interaction test p=0·029). Use of bevacizumab versus chemotherapy alone was associated with increased incidences of grade 3 or worse hypertension (154 patients [12%] vs eight patients [1%]), severe cardiac events occurring at any point during the 18-month safety reporting period (19 [1%] vs two [<0·5%]), and treatment discontinuation (bevacizumab, chemotherapy, or both; 256 [20%] vs 30 [2%]); we recorded no increase in fatal adverse events with bevacizumab (four [<0·5%] vs three [<0·5%]). INTERPRETATION: Bevacizumab cannot be recommended as adjuvant treatment in unselected patients with triple-negative breast cancer. Further follow-up is needed to assess the potential effect of bevacizumab on overall survival.