Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial of MUC1 Peptide Vaccine for Prevention of Recurrent Colorectal Adenoma.

PURPOSE: To assess whether MUC1 peptide vaccine produces an immune response and prevents subsequent colon adenoma formation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial in individuals age 40 to 70 with diagnosis of an advanced adenoma ≤1 year from randomization. Vaccine was administered at 0, 2, and 10 weeks with a booster injection at week 53. Adenoma recurrence was assessed ≥1 year from randomization. The primary endpoint was vaccine immunogenicity at 12 weeks defined by anti-MUC1 ratio ≥2.0. RESULTS: Fifty-three participants received the MUC1 vaccine and 50 placebo. Thirteen of 52 (25%) MUC1 vaccine recipients had a ≥2-fold increase in MUC1 IgG (range, 2.9-17.3) at week 12 versus 0/50 placebo recipients (one-sided Fisher exact P < 0.0001). Of 13 responders at week 12, 11 (84.6%) responded to a booster injection at week 52 with a ≥2-fold increase in MUC1 IgG measured at week 55. Recurrent adenoma was observed in 31 of 47 (66.0%) in the placebo group versus 27 of 48 (56.3%) in the MUC1 group [adjusted relative risk (aRR), 0.83; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.60-1.14; P = 0.25]. Adenoma recurrence occurred in 3/11 (27.3%) immune responders at week 12 and week 55 (aRR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.15-1.11; P = 0.08 compared with placebo). There was no difference in serious adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: An immune response was observed only in vaccine recipients. Adenoma recurrence was not different than placebo, but a 38% absolute reduction in adenoma recurrence compared with placebo was observed in participants who had an immune response at week 12 and with the booster injection.

Phase II trial of weekly erlotinib dosing to reduce duodenal polyp burden associated with familial adenomatous polyposis.

IMPORTANCE: Patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) are at markedly increased risk for duodenal adenomas and cancer. Combination sulindac and erlotinib was previously shown to reduce duodenal polyp burden but was associated with a relatively high adverse event (AE) rate. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate if a once weekly dosing schedule for erlotinib intervention improves the AE profile, while still providing efficacy with respect to reduced polyp burden, in participants with FAP. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Single-arm trial, enrolling 46 participants with FAP, conducted from October 2017 to September 2019 in eight academic cancer centres. EXPOSURES: Participants self-administered 350 mg of erlotinib by mouth, one time per week for 6 months. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Duodenal polyp burden (sum of polyp diameters) was assessed in the proximal duodenum by esophagogastroduodenoscopy performed at baseline and 6 months, with mean per cent change defined as the primary efficacy outcome of interest. Rate of grade 2-3 AEs was evaluated as a co-primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included changes in total duodenal polyp count, along with changes in lower gastrointestinal (GI) polyp burden and count (for participants examined by optional lower endoscopy). RESULTS: Forty-six participants (mean age, 44.1 years (range, 18-68); women, 22 (48%)) were enrolled; 42 participants completed 6 months of intervention and were included in the per-protocol analysis. Duodenal polyp burden was significantly reduced after 6 months of weekly erlotinib intervention, with a mean per cent change of -29.6% (95% CI, -39.6% to -19.7%; p<0.0001). Similar results were observed in subgroup analyses defined by participants with advanced duodenal polyposis (Spigelman 3) at baseline (mean, -27%; 95% CI, -38.7% to -15.2%; p<0.0001). Post-intervention Spigelman stage was downstaged in 12% of the participants. Lower GI polyp number was also decreased after 6 months of intervention (median, -30.8%; IQR, -47.4% to 0.0%; p=0.0256). Grade 2 or 3 AEs were reported in 71.7% of subjects, with only two experiencing grade 3 toxicity at least possibly related to intervention. CONCLUSION: In this single-arm, multi-centre trial of participants with FAP, erlotinib one time per week resulted in markedly lower duodenal polyp burden, and modestly reduced lower GI polyp burden, after 6 months of intervention. While AEs were still reported by nearly three-quarters of all participants, these events were generally lower grade and well-tolerated. These findings support further investigation of erlotinib as an effective, acceptable cancer preventive agent for FAP-associated GI polyposis. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02961374.

Efficacy of Treatment With Armodafinil for Cancer-Related Fatigue in Patients With High-grade Glioma: A Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Nearly 96% of patients with high-grade glioma (HGG) report moderate-to-severe fatigue. Armodafinil is a psychostimulant that might help cancer-related fatigue in patients with HGG. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether armodafinil reduces fatigue in patients with HGG and moderate-to-severe fatigue. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In this randomized multicenter, phase 3, double-blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trial, adults with HGG and moderate-to-severe fatigue who were clinically stable at least 4 weeks after completing radiation therapy were randomized to receive armodafinil daily (150 mg or 250 mg) or placebo over 8 weeks. A score of at least 6 out of 10 on severity scale for the brief fatigue inventory scale, with 10 being the worst, was required to suggest moderate-to-severe fatigue. Patients were allowed stable doses of corticosteroids but were excluded if they required increasing amounts of corticosteroids, were receiving some other treatment for fatigue, or had an uncontrolled seizure disorder. The study was conducted from June 2013 to December 15, 2019. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized to 150 mg of armodafinil, 250 mg of armodafinil, or placebo for a total of 8 weeks with assessments at weeks 4 and 8. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was efficacy in treating cancer-related fatigue. Secondary outcomes included safety, neurocognitive function, and quality of life. Patients were evaluated at baseline and at weeks 4 and 8. Efficacy between the placebo and the 2 doses of study drug was determined by an improvement by 2 points on the 0 to 10 brief fatigue inventory scale. Kruskal-Wallis and χ2 tests were used and followed by confirmatory analyses. RESULTS: A total of 328 patients were enrolled, of whom 297 had evaluable end point data. Of these, 103 received 150 mg of armodafinil (mean [SD] age, 58.5 [11.9] years; 42 women [40.8%]), 97 250 mg of armodafinil (mean [SD] age, 56.6 [12.5] years; 37 women [38.1%]), and 97 placebo (mean [SD] age, 57.1 [12.5] years; 39 women [40.2%]). There was no difference in the proportion of patients who achieved clinically meaningful fatigue reduction between arms (28% [95% CI 20%-30%] for 150 mg of armodafinil, 28% [95% CI 19%-38%] for 250 mg of armodafinil, and 30% [95% CI 21%-40%] for placebo). There was a statistically significant reduction in global fatigue for corticosteroid users compared with nonusers (-0.7 [95% CI, -1.5 to -0.3] vs -1.7 [95% CI, -2.1 to -1.3]; P < .001). More patients (2 vs 7) reported insomnia with treatment with 250 mg of armodafinil. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The results of this randomized clinical trial found no meaningful benefit of using treatment with armodafinil to reduce cancer-related fatigue in patients with HGG. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01781468.

Phase I double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of dolcanatide (SP-333) 27 mg to explore colorectal bioactivity in healthy volunteers.

Guanylyl cyclase C (GUCY2C) is a tumor-suppressing receptor silenced by loss of expression of the luminocrine hormones guanylin and uroguanylin early in colorectal carcinogenesis. This observation suggests oral replacement with a GUCY2C agonist may be an effective targeted chemoprevention agent. Previous studies revealed that linaclotide, an oral GUCY2C agonist formulated for gastric release, did not persist to activate guanylyl cyclase signaling in the distal rectum. Dolcanatide is an investigational oral uroguanylin analog, substituted with select D amino acids, for enhanced stability and extended persistence to activate GUCY2C in small and large intestine. However, the ability of oral dolcanatide to induce a pharmacodynamic (PD) response by activating GUCY2C in epithelial cells of the colorectum in humans remains undefined. Here, we demonstrate that administration of oral dolcanatide 27 mg daily for 7 d to healthy volunteers did not activate GUCY2C, quantified as accumulation of its product cyclic GMP, in epithelial cells of the distal rectum. These data reveal that the enhanced stability of dolcanatide, with persistence along the rostral-caudal axis of the small and large intestine, is inadequate to regulate GUCY2C across the colorectum to prevent tumorigenesis. These results highlight the importance of developing a GUCY2C agonist for cancer prevention formulated for release and activity targeted to the colorectum.

Toxicity and survival outcomes in older adults receiving concurrent or sequential chemoradiation for stage III non-small cell lung cancer in Alliance trials (Alliance A151812).

INTRODUCTION: Optimal treatment for older adults with stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains unclear. Here we hypothesized that sequential chemoradiation therapy (sCRT) is better tolerated than concurrent (cCRT) but confers acceptable efficacy. We evaluated these strategies in older adults utilizing Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology data. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Pooled analyses from 6 first-line stage III NSCLC CRT trials (Cancer and Leukemia Group B 8433, 8831, 9130, 30106, 30407, 39801) were used to compare toxicity and survival outcomes with cCRT versus sCRT in patients age ≥ 65 years. Grade 3-5 adverse events (AEs), progression-free and overall survival (PFS; OS) are reported with adjustment for covariates. RESULTS: Four hundred older adults, of whom 106 (26.5%) had received sCRT and 294 (73.5%) had received cCRT, comprised the cohorts. Virtually all had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) 0-1 (99%). More grade 3-5 AEs were observed at any time-point with cCRT than sCRT (94.2% versus 86.8%; 95% confidence interval for difference in proportions, 1.3%, 15.5%) and this finding remained after adjusting for length of study treatment (P = 0.018). Comparable PFS and OS were observed with sCRT versus cCRT (median: 8.0 versus 9.2 months; median: 11.9 versus 13.4 months, respectively) even after adjustment for age, sex, ECOG PS, body mass index, pretreatment weight loss, stage, and cisplatin-based therapy (P = 0.604 and P = 0.906, respectively). DISCUSSION: These data show that sCRT was associated with less toxicity than cCRT with no associated statistically significant decrease in efficacy outcomes and that sCRT merits further study in this population.

Scrambler therapy for chemotherapy neuropathy: a randomized phase II pilot trial.

INTRODUCTION: Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is a prominent clinical problem, with limited effective therapies. Preliminary non-randomized clinical trial data support that Scrambler Therapy is helpful in this situation. METHODS: Patients were eligible if they had CIPN symptoms for at least 3 months and CIPN-related tingling or pain at least 4/10 in severity during the week prior to registration. They were randomized to receive Scrambler Therapy versus transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for 2 weeks. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were utilized to measure efficacy and toxicity daily for 2 weeks during therapy and then weekly for 8 additional weeks. RESULTS: This study accrued 50 patients, 25 to each of the 2 study arms; 46 patients were evaluable. There were twice as many Scrambler-treated patients who had at least a 50% documented improvement during the 2 treatment weeks, from their baseline pain, tingling, and numbness scores, when compared with the TENS-treated patients (from 36 to 56% compared with 16-28% for each symptom). Global Impression of Change scores for "neuropathy symptoms," pain, and quality of life were similarly improved during the treatment weeks. Patients in the Scrambler group were more likely than those in the TENS group to recommend their treatment to other patients, during both the 2-week treatment period and the 8-week follow-up period (p < 0.0001). Minimal toxicity was observed. CONCLUSIONS: The results from this pilot trial were positive, supporting the conduct of further investigations regarding the use of Scrambler Therapy for treating CIPN.

Time-to-Treatment-Failure and Related Outcomes Among 1000+ Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients: Comparisons Between Older Versus Younger Patients (Alliance A151711).

INTRODUCTION: Time-to-treatment-failure (TTF) is the interval from chemotherapy initiation to premature discontinuation. We evaluated TTF based on age. METHODS: Pooled analyses were conducted with first-line chemotherapy trials for advanced NSCLC (CALGB 9730, 30203, and 30801). Comparisons among patients who were 65 years and older and 70 years and older were performed for TTF (primary endpoint), reasons for early chemotherapy cessation, grade 3+ adverse events, and overall survival. RESULTS: Among 1006 patients, 460 (46%) were older than 65 years of age. One hundred forty-five older patients (32% of this age cohort) completed all six planned chemotherapy cycles as did 170 (32%) younger patients. Median TTF was 2.9 months (95% confidence interval: 2.7- 3.2) in older patients and 3 months (95% confidence interval: 2.9-3.5) in younger patients; adjustment for performance status and stratification by chemotherapy by trial yielded no statistically significant age-based difference in TTF. However, reasons for early chemotherapy cessation differed between age groups (multivariate p = 0.004). Older patients were less likely to discontinue from cancer progression (41% versus 55%) and more likely from toxicity or patient choice (16% and 15%, respectively) compared to younger patients (13% and 6%, respectively). Older patients were more likely to experience grade 3+ adverse events (86% versus 79%) with no statistically significant difference in survival. An age cutpoint of 70+ years showed no difference in TTF, a lower trend of early cessation due to cancer progression, and somewhat shorter older patient survival. CONCLUSIONS: TTF was comparable between older and younger patients; but different, age-based, and potentially modifiable reasons account for it.