Comparative Efficacy of Talquetamab vs. Current Treatments in the LocoMMotion and MoMMent Studies in Patients with Triple-Class-Exposed Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma.

INTRODUCTION: Talquetamab, a bispecific antibody targeting GPRC5D × CD3, is approved for the treatment of patients with triple-class -exposed (TCE) relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) on the basis of the results from the phase I/II MonumenTAL-1 trial. The relative effectiveness of talquetamab vs. real-world physician's choice of therapy (RWPC) was assessed using adjusted comparisons. METHODS: An external control arm for MonumenTAL-1 (subcutaneously administered talquetamab 0.4 mg/kg weekly [QW] and 0.8 mg/kg every other week [Q2W]) was created from two observational real-world studies: LocoMMotion and MoMMent. Imbalances in baseline covariates were adjusted using inverse probability weighting. The relative effectiveness of talquetamab vs. RWPC was estimated for overall response rate (ORR), ≥ very good partial response (VGPR), and ≥ complete response (CR); odds ratios and relative response ratios (RRs) were derived from weighted logistic regression. Hazard ratios (HRs) for duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), time to next treatment (TTNT), and overall survival (OS) were estimated using a weighted Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: After reweighting, baseline characteristics were balanced across cohorts. In adjusted comparisons, patients treated with talquetamab QW (n = 143) had significantly improved outcomes vs. RWPC; RRs were ORR 2.67, p < 0.0001; ≥ VGPR 4.70, p < 0.0001; ≥ CR 78.05, p = 0.0002; and HRs were PFS 0.52, p < 0.0001; TTNT 0.48, p < 0.0001; OS 0.36, p < 0.0001. Patients treated with talquetamab Q2W (n = 145) also had significantly improved outcomes vs. RWPC; RRs were ORR 2.62, p < 0.0001; ≥ VGPR 5.04, p < 0.0001; ≥ CR 101.14, p = 0.0002; and HRs were PFS 0.40, p < 0.0001; TTNT 0.39, p < 0.0001; OS 0.37, p < 0.0001. CONCLUSION: Effectiveness of talquetamab for both schedules was significantly better than RWPC for ORR, ≥ VGPR, ≥ CR, PFS, OS, and TTNT, highlighting its clinical benefit for patients with TCE RRMM. TRIAL REGISTRATION: MonumenTAL-1, ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT03399799/NCT04634552; LocoMMotion, ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT04035226; MoMMent, ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT05160584.

Teclistamab versus real-world physician's choice of therapy in triple-class exposed relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.

Aim: We compared the effectiveness of teclistamab versus real-world physician's choice of therapy (RWPC) in triple-class exposed relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. Materials & methods: MajesTEC-1 eligibility criteria were applied to the RWPC cohort. Baseline covariate imbalances were adjusted using inverse probability of treatment weighting. Overall survival, progression-free survival and time to next treatment were compared. Results: After inverse probability of treatment weighting, baseline characteristics were similar between cohorts (teclistamab, n = 165; RWPC, n = 364 [766 observations]). Teclistamab treated patients had numerically better overall survival (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.82 [95% CI: 0.59-1.14]; p = 0.233) and significantly greater progression-free survival (HR: 0.43 [0.33-0.56]; p < 0.0001) and time to next treatment (HR: 0.36 [0.27-0.49]; p < 0.0001) versus the RWPC cohort. Conclusion: Teclistamab offered clinical benefit over RWPC in triple-class exposed relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.

Comparative Efficacy of Teclistamab Versus Physician's Choice of Therapy in the Long-term Follow-up of APOLLO, POLLUX, CASTOR, and EQUULEUS Clinical Trials in Patients With Triple-class Exposed Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of teclistamab in patients with RRMM who received ≥3 prior lines of therapy and were triple-class exposed (TCE) are being evaluated in the single-arm, multicohort, phase I/II MajesTEC-1 trial (NCT04557098). We evaluated the comparative effectiveness of teclistamab versus physician's choice (PC) of therapy in TCE RRMM patients. METHODS: Individual patient-level data from MajesTEC-1 patients who received teclistamab (1.5 mg/kg weekly; clinical cutoff March 16, 2022) were included. An external control arm was created from patients in long-term follow-up of 4 clinical trials of daratumumab who were treated with PC therapy after discontinuation of trial treatments. In the primary analysis, inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to adjust for imbalances in 9 baseline covariates. A fully adjusted model included 5 additional prognostic factors. Outcomes included overall response rate (ORR), very good partial response or better (≥VGPR) rate, overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and time to next treatment (TTNT). RESULTS: After adjustment, baseline characteristics were balanced between cohorts. In the primary analysis, outcomes were significantly improved with teclistamab versus PC: ORR (OR [95% CI] 4.81 [3.04-7.72]; P < .0001); ≥VGPR rate (OR, 12.07 [6.91-22.11]; P < .0001); OS (HR, 0.54 [0.40-0.73]; P < .0001); PFS (HR, 0.59 [0.46-0.78]; P = .0001); and TTNT (HR, 0.32 [0.24-0.42]; P < .0001). Results of the fully adjusted model were consistent with the primary analysis. CONCLUSION: Teclistamab showed significantly improved effectiveness versus PC on all outcomes, highlighting its clinical benefit in patients with TCE RRMM and limited treatment options.

Overall survival and histology-specific subgroup analyses from a phase 3, randomized controlled study of trabectedin or dacarbazine in patients with advanced liposarcoma or leiomyosarcoma.

BACKGROUND: We performed a randomized phase 3 study of trabectedin versus dacarbazine in previously-treated patients with liposarcoma/leiomyosarcoma (LPS/LMS). METHODS: Patients were randomized 2:1 to trabectedin (n = 384) or dacarbazine (n = 193) administered intravenously every 3 weeks. The primary objective was overall survival (OS). Secondary objectives were progression-free survival, objective response rate, safety, and patient-reported outcomes, all previously reported and demonstrating superior disease control with trabectedin. Results of the final OS analysis in preplanned subgroups of patients with LPS/LMS are presented. RESULTS: At the time of the final OS analysis, 577 patients had been assigned randomly, including 423 (73%) with LMS and 154 (27%) with LPS. The median duration of treatment exposure was higher in the trabectedin arm compared with the dacarbazine arm (4 vs 2 cycles), as was the proportion of patients receiving an extended number of therapy courses (≥6 cycles: 42% vs 22%). This pattern was consistent across histological subgroups: the median number of treatment cycles (4 vs 2 for both subgroups) and proportion of patients with ≥6 treatment cycles (LMS, 43% vs 24%; LPS, 40% vs 16%). Despite improved disease control by trabectedin, no improvement in OS was observed; the final median OS for trabectedin versus dacarbazine was 13.7 versus 13.1 months (P = .49). Sensitivity analyses of OS suggest confounding by post-study anticancer therapies, which were utilized in most patients in both treatment arms (71% vs 69%, respectively). CONCLUSION: The final OS results demonstrated comparable survival between LPS/LMS patients receiving trabectedin or dacarbazine, which is consistent with the interim analysis results. Both LPS and LMS demonstrated improved disease control with trabectedin.

Multicenter Phase I Study of Erdafitinib (JNJ-42756493), Oral Pan-Fibroblast Growth Factor Receptor Inhibitor, in Patients with Advanced or Refractory Solid Tumors.

PURPOSE: Here, we report results of the first phase I study of erdafitinib, a potent, oral pan-FGFR inhibitor. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients age ≥18 years with advanced solid tumors for which standard antineoplastic therapy was no longer effective were enrolled (NCT01703481). Parts 2 to 4 employed molecular screening for activating FGFR genomic alterations. In patients with such alterations, two selected doses/schedules identified during part 1 dose-escalation [9 mg once daily and 10 mg intermittently (7 days on/7 days off), as previously published (Tabernero JCO 2015;33:3401-8)] were tested. RESULTS: The study included 187 patients. The most common treatment-related adverse events were hyperphosphatemia (64%), dry mouth (42%), and asthenia (28%), generally grade 1/2 severity. All cases of hyperphosphatemia were grade 1/2 except for 1 grade 3 event. Skin, nail, and eye changes were observed in 43%, 33%, and 28% of patients, respectively (mostly grade 1/2 and reversible after temporary dosing interruption). Urothelial carcinoma and cholangiocarcinoma were most responsive to erdafitinib, with objective response rates (ORR) of 46.2% (12/26) and 27.3% (3/11), respectively, in response-evaluable patients with FGFR mutations or fusions. All patients with urothelial carcinoma and cholangiocarcinoma who responded to erdafitinib carried FGFR mutations or fusions. Median response duration was 5.6 months for urothelial carcinoma and 11.4 months for cholangiocarcinoma. ORRs in other tumor types were <10%. CONCLUSIONS: Erdafitinib shows tolerability and preliminary clinical activity in advanced solid tumors with genomic changes in the FGFR pathway, at two different dosing schedules and with particularly encouraging responses in urothelial carcinoma and cholangiocarcinoma.

Hepatic safety analysis of trabectedin: results of a pharmacokinetic study with trabectedin in patients with hepatic impairment and experience from a phase 3 clinical trial.

Purpose Trabectedin is metabolized by the liver and has been associated with transient, noncumulative transaminase elevation. Two recent studies further characterize hepatic tolerability with trabectedin therapy: a phase 1 pharmacokinetic study (Study #1004; NCT01273493) in patients with advanced malignancies and hepatic impairment (HI), and a phase 3 study (Study #3007; NCT01343277) of trabectedin vs. dacarbazine in patients with advanced sarcomas and normal hepatic function. Methods In Study #1004, patients received a single 3-h intravenous (IV) infusion of trabectedin: control group, trabectedin 1.3 mg/m2; HI group (baseline total bilirubin >1.5 and ≤3× upper limit of normal [ULN]; AST and ALT ≤2.5× ULN), trabectedin 0.58 or 0.9 mg/m2. In Study #3007, the trabectedin group received 1.5 mg/m2 by 24-h IV infusion every 3 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Results In Study #1004, dose-normalized trabectedin exposure was higher in HI patients (n = 6) versus controls (n = 9) (geometric mean ratios [90% CI] AUClast: 1.97 [1.20; 3.22]). In Study #3007, following trabectedin administration, 90% of patients had elevated ALT (32% grade 3-4) and 84% had elevated AST (17% grade 3-4). Transaminase elevations were transient and noncumulative. Progression-free survival was similar in patients with grade 3-4 hepatotoxicity (n = 109) versus grade 0-2 hepatotoxicity (n = 231) (median [95% CI]: 4.63 [4.01, 5.85] months versus 3.55 [2.73, 4.63] months; P = 0.545, HR = 0.91 [0.68-1.23]). Conclusion Trabectedin treatment of patients with HI results in higher plasma exposures. Hepatotoxicity in patients with normal liver function can be effectively addressed through dose reductions and delays.

Efficacy and safety of trabectedin or dacarbazine in patients with advanced uterine leiomyosarcoma after failure of anthracycline-based chemotherapy: Subgroup analysis of a phase 3, randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: Trabectedin demonstrated significantly improved disease control in leiomyosarcoma and liposarcoma patients in a global phase 3 trial (NCT01343277). A post hoc analysis was conducted to assess the efficacy and safety of trabectedin or dacarbazine in women with uterine leiomyosarcoma (uLMS), the largest subgroup of enrolled patients (40%). METHODS: Of 577 patients randomized 2:1 to receive trabectedin 1.5mg/m2 by 24-hour IV infusion or dacarbazine 1g/m2 by 20-120-minute IV infusion once every three weeks, 232 had uLMS (trabectedin: 144; dacarbazine: 88). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS); secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), clinical benefit rate (CBR: complete responses+partial responses+stable disease [SD] for at least 18weeks), duration of response (DOR), and safety. RESULTS: PFS for trabectedin was 4.0months compared with 1.5months for dacarbazine (hazard ratio [HR]=0.57; 95% CI 0.41-0.81; P=0.0012). OS was similar (trabectedin 13.4months vs. dacarbazine 12.9months, HR=0.89; 95% CI 0.65-1.24; P=0.51) between groups. ORR was 11% with trabectedin vs. 9% with dacarbazine (P=0.82). CBR for trabectedin was 31% vs. 18% with dacarbazine (P=0.05); median DOR was 6.5months for trabectedin vs. 4.1months for dacarbazine (P=0.32). Grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events observed in ≥10% of patients in the trabectedin group included transient aminotransferase (aspartate/alanine) elevations, anemia, leukopenia, and thrombocytopenia. CONCLUSIONS: In this post hoc subset analysis of patients with uLMS who had received prior anthracycline therapy, trabectedin treatment resulted in significantly longer PFS versus dacarbazine, with an acceptable safety profile. There was no difference in OS.

Final overall survival results of a randomized trial comparing bortezomib plus pegylated liposomal doxorubicin with bortezomib alone in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma.

BACKGROUND: Previous results from an interim analysis of an open-label, randomized, phase 3 study demonstrated that bortezomib combined with pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) was superior to bortezomib monotherapy in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma who had previously received one or more lines of therapy. Protocol-defined final survival data from that study are provided here. METHODS: Patients were randomized (1:1) to receive either bortezomib alone (1.3 mg/m(2) intravenously on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 of every 21-day cycle) or bortezomib-PLD (bortezomib plus PLD 30 mg/m(2) intravenously on day 4). The primary endpoint was the time to progression. Secondary efficacy endpoints included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival, and the overall response rate. RESULTS: In total, 646 patients (bortezomib-PLD, n = 324; bortezomib alone, n = 322) were randomized between December, 2004, and March, 2006. On the clinical cutoff date (May 16, 2014) for the final survival analysis, at a median follow-up of 103 months, 79% of patients had died (bortezomib-PLD group: 253 of 324 patients; 78%; bortezomib alone group: 257 of 322 patients; 80%). The median OS in the bortezomib-PLD group was 33 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 28.9-37.1) versus 30.8 months (95% CI, 25.2-36.5) in the bortezomib alone group (hazard ratio, 1.047; 95% CI, 0.879-1.246; P = .6068). Salvage therapies included conventional and novel drugs, which were well balanced between the two treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Despite inducing a superior time to progression, long-term follow-up revealed that PLD-bortezomib did not improve OS compared with bortezomib alone in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. The inability to sustain the early observed survival advantage may have been caused by the effects of subsequent lines of therapy, and underscores the need for long-term follow-up of phase 3 trials while recognizing the challenge of having adequate power to detect long-term differences in OS. Cancer 2016;122:2050-6. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Efficacy and Safety of Trabectedin or Dacarbazine for Metastatic Liposarcoma or Leiomyosarcoma After Failure of Conventional Chemotherapy: Results of a Phase III Randomized Multicenter Clinical Trial.

PURPOSE: This multicenter study, to our knowledge, is the first phase III trial to compare trabectedin versus dacarbazine in patients with advanced liposarcoma or leiomyosarcoma after prior therapy with an anthracycline and at least one additional systemic regimen. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive trabectedin or dacarbazine intravenously every 3 weeks. The primary end point was overall survival (OS), secondary end points were disease control-progression-free survival (PFS), time to progression, objective response rate, and duration of response-as well as safety and patient-reported symptom scoring. RESULTS: A total of 518 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to either trabectedin (n = 345) or dacarbazine (n = 173). In the final analysis of PFS, trabectedin administration resulted in a 45% reduction in the risk of disease progression or death compared with dacarbazine (median PFS for trabectedin v dacarbazine, 4.2 v 1.5 months; hazard ratio, 0.55; P < .001); benefits were observed across all preplanned subgroup analyses. The interim analysis of OS (64% censored) demonstrated a 13% reduction in risk of death in the trabectedin arm compared with dacarbazine (median OS for trabectedin v dacarbazine, 12.4 v 12.9 months; hazard ratio, 0.87; P = .37). The safety profiles were consistent with the well-characterized toxicities of both agents, and the most common grade 3 to 4 adverse effects were myelosuppression and transient elevation of transaminases in the trabectedin arm. CONCLUSION: Trabectedin demonstrates superior disease control versus conventional dacarbazine in patients who have advanced liposarcoma and leiomyosarcoma after they experience failure of prior chemotherapy. Because disease control in advanced sarcomas is a clinically relevant end point, this study supports the activity of trabectedin for patients with these malignancies.

Phase I study of the safety and pharmacokinetics of trabectedin with docetaxel in patients with advanced malignancies.

PURPOSE: Combination therapy with trabectedin and docetaxel was evaluated in patients with advanced malignancies. METHODS: In this open-label phase 1 study, docetaxel (60 or 75 mg/m(2); 1-h intravenous infusion) was given on day 1 of a 21-day cycle in combination with escalating doses of trabectedin (0.4-1.3 mg/m(2) by 3-h intravenous infusion, 1 h after docetaxel) and prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF). Maximum tolerated dose (MTD) as primary objective and safety, plasma pharmacokinetics, and antitumor activity as secondary objectives were assessed. RESULTS: Patients (N = 49) received a median of four cycles of treatment. MTD was 1.3 mg/m(2) trabectedin and 60 mg/m(2) docetaxel for patients with limited and 1.1 mg/m(2) trabectedin and 60 mg/m(2) docetaxel for patients with unlimited prior chemotherapy. Dose-limiting toxicities (during cycle 1) included elevated alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and fatigue in patients with limited prior chemotherapy and elevated ALT and febrile neutropenia in those with unlimited prior chemotherapy. The most common drug-related adverse events were nausea (65 %), fatigue (63 %), and neutropenia (53 %). One patient achieved a complete response. Thirty patients had stable disease, and 11 had stable disease for ≥6 months. Pharmacokinetic results for trabectedin plus docetaxel were similar to those previously reported for the single agents. CONCLUSION: In patients with previously treated, advanced malignancies, the combination of therapeutic doses of trabectedin and docetaxel showed clinical activity and was tolerable with prophylactic G-CSF, with no evidence of clinically important drug interactions.

Impact of cytochrome P450 3A4 inducer and inhibitor on the pharmacokinetics of trabectedin in patients with advanced malignancies: open-label, multicenter studies.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the pharmacokinetics, safety and survival of trabectedin, metabolized primarily by cytochrome P450 (CYP)3A4 enzyme, when coadministered with rifampin (CYP3A4 inducer) or ketoconazole (CYP3A4 inhibitor) in adult patients with advanced solid tumors. METHODS: Two phase 1/2a, 2-way crossover studies were conducted. For rifampin study, 12 patients were randomized (1:1) to sequence of a cycle of trabectedin (1.3 mg/m(2), 3 h, i.v.) coadministered with rifampin (600 mg/day, 6-days), and a cycle of trabectedin monotherapy (1.3 mg/m(2), 3 h, i.v.). In ketoconazole study, eight patients were randomized (1:1) to sequence of a cycle of trabectedin (0.58 mg/m(2), 3 h, i.v.) coadministered with ketoconazole (200 mg, twice-daily, 15-doses), and a cycle of trabectedin monotherapy (1.3 mg/m(2), 3 h, i.v.). RESULTS: The systemic exposure (geometric means) of trabectedin was decreased [22% (C max) and 31% (AUClast)] with rifampin coadministration and increased [22% (C max) and 66% (AUClast)] with ketoconazole coadministration. This correlated with an increased clearance with rifampin (39.6-59.8 L/h) and a decreased clearance with ketoconazole (20.3-12.0 L/h). Consistent with earlier studies, the most common (≥40%) treatment-emergent adverse events in both studies were nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, hepatic function abnormal, anemia, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia and leukopenia. CONCLUSIONS: Coadministration of rifampin or ketoconazole altered the pharmacokinetics of trabectedin, but no new safety signals were observed. Coadministration of trabectedin with potent CYP3A4 inhibitors or inducers should be avoided if possible. If coadministration of trabectedin with a strong CYP3A4 inhibitor is required, close monitoring for toxicities is recommended, so that appropriate dose reductions can be instituted as warranted.

The association between body composition and toxicities from the combination of Doxil and trabectedin in patients with advanced relapsed ovarian cancer.

Emerging research suggests that body composition can predict toxicity of certain chemotherapeutic agents. We used data from a clinical study to investigate associations between body composition and combined DOXIL (pegylated liposomal doxorubicin; PLD) and trabectedin (Yondelis) treatment, an effective treatment for ovarian cancer that shows high interpatient variation in toxicity profile. Patients (n = 74) participating in a phase III randomized trial of relapsed advanced ovarian cancer receiving PLD (30 mg/m(2)) and trabectedin (1.1 mg/m(2)) were included. Muscle tissue was measured by analysis of computerized tomography images, and an extrapolation of muscle and adipose tissue to lean body mass (LBM) and fat mass (FM) were employed. Toxicity profile after cycle 1 was used and graded according to the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria (version 3). Patients presented with a wide range of body composition. In overweight and obese patients (body mass index (BMI) ≥ 25 kg/m(2), n = 48) toxicity was more prevalent in those with lower BMI (p = 0.028) and a lower FM (n = 43, p = 0.034). Although LBM alone was not predictive of toxicity, a lower FM/LBM ratio was the most powerful variable associated with toxicity (p = 0.006). A different pattern emerged among normal weight patients (n = 26) where toxicity was rare among patients with smaller BMI (<21 kg/m(2)). A clear association between both FM and LBM (primarily driven by FM) in explaining PLD plus trabectedin toxicity emerged, but only in individuals with excess body weight, with a lower ratio predicting higher exposure and risk for toxicity.

Nibrin is a marker of clinical outcome in patients with advanced serous ovarian cancer treated in the phase III OVA-301 trial.

OBJECTIVE: This study investigated the relationship between 13 proteins involved in DNA damage and the outcomes of patients with recurrent ovarian cancer (ROC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Immunohistochemistry staining was performed in 114 diagnostic samples from patients with serous ROC who participated in the OVA-301 study, which compared pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) with a combination of trabectedin plus PLD. Percentage of positive cells for every marker was calculated and correlated with overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: A statistically significant correlation between high levels of nibrin and lower ORR (P=0.03), shorter PFS (P=0.007) and shorter OS (P=0.01) was observed. After stratification, in patients with platinum-sensitive disease treated with the combination of trabectedin plus PLD, high levels of nibrin correlated with lower ORR (P=0.01) and shorter PFS (P=0.02). A better clinical outcome (ORR, PFS and OS) was also associated to low levels of CHK2 in trabectedin plus PLD treated patients. No correlations were found in PLD-treated patients. According to the results of a multivariate analysis, there was a statistically significant correlation between high nibrin (P=0.001) and low BRCA2 levels (P=0.03) and a worse PFS, and between high nibrin levels and a worse OS (P=0.006). CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that high nibrin expression seems to be associated with a worse clinical outcome in serous ROC, particularly in patients treated with the combination trabectedin plus PLD. Prospective studies to determine clinical usefulness of nibrin as a possible biomarker in other series of patients with ROC are warranted.

Trabectedin as single agent in relapsed advanced ovarian cancer: results from a retrospective pooled analysis of three phase II trials.

Three phase II studies evaluated trabectedin monotherapy as second-/third-line therapy in patients with refractory/recurrent ovarian cancer (ROC). Three different schedules were investigated: 3-h infusion every 3 weeks (3-h_q3w), 24-h infusion q3w (24-h_q3w), and 3-h weekly infusion for 3 weeks of a 4-week cycle. This retrospective pooled analysis evaluated the efficacy and the safety profile of trabectedin according to each administered regimen. Data from 295 patients were used to compare weekly versus q3w schedules, and 3-h versus 24-h infusion given q3w. Both q3w regimens showed higher overall response rate (36 vs. 16 %; p = 0.0001), disease control rate (66 vs. 46 %; p = 0.0007), and longer median progression-free survival (5.6 vs. 2.8 months; p < 0.0001) than the weekly schedule. Comparable activity was observed for the 3- and 24-h infusions q3w. Common adverse events were nausea, fatigue, vomiting, transient neutropenia, and transaminase increases. A better safety profile regarding neutropenia, fatigue, and vomiting was seen for the 3-h_q3w regimen as compared to the 24-h_q3w one. Trabectedin given as a single agent q3w as 3-h infusion is the schedule of choice for the treatment of ROC, and its efficacy and safety profile favorably compares with other active salvage treatments.

Patient-reported outcomes in relapsed ovarian cancer: results from a randomized Phase III study of trabectedin with pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) versus PLD alone.

OBJECTIVE: Trabectedin in combination with PLD improves progression-free survival (PFS) and overall response rate (ORR) in comparison to PLD alone in patients with relapsed ovarian cancer (J Clin Oncol; 2010 28:3107-14). Here we report the impact of the treatment combination on patient-reported functional status and symptoms. METHODS: Patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires, EORTC-QLQ C30, OV28, and EQ-5D were completed by patients at screening and on Day 1 of every other treatment cycle starting with Cycle 1, and at the end-of-treatment visit. RESULTS: Of the 672 patients randomized in this study, 663 treated patients completed at least one of the baseline questionnaires. Median cycles of treatment was 6 (131 days) for the combination arm and 5 (143 days) for the monotherapy arm. Longitudinal data analyses showed no significant differences between the treatment arms for any of the pre-specified scales. Similar analyses of other scales, including Health Index scores and Health State on the Visual Analog Scale, support these findings. Start of subsequent therapy was significantly delayed in the combination arm compared with the monotherapy arm (p=0.0032). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of trabectedin to PLD led to little or no decrement in patient-reported functional status and symptoms in patients with relapsed ovarian cancer, as compared to treatment with PLD alone. The combination led to manageable and non-cumulative overall toxicity with a fewer PLD-associated adverse events, and a significant improvement in PFS and ORR compared to single agent.

Trabectedin plus pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) versus PLD in recurrent ovarian cancer: overall survival analysis.

AIM: Trabectedin in combination with pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) improves progression-free survival (PFS) compared to PLD alone in recurrent ovarian cancer (J Clin Oncol 2010;28:3107-14). METHODS: Women, stratified by performance status (0-1 versus 2) and platinum sensitivity (platinum-free interval [PFI]<6 versus ≥ 6 months), were randomly assigned to receive PLD 30 mg/m(2) IV followed by a 3-h infusion of trabectedin 1.1mg/m(2) every 3 weeks or PLD 50mg/m(2) every 4 weeks. The study was powered to show a 33% increase in overall survival (OS) after 520 deaths had occurred. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 47.4 months, there were 522 deaths among 672 subjects. The median OS for trabectedin+PLD and PLD arms was 22.2 and 18.9 months, respectively (hazard ratio [HR]=0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.72-1.02; p=0.0835). An unexpected but significant imbalance in the PFI favouring the PLD arm (mean PFI: PLD=13.3 months, trabectedin+PLD=10.6 months) was identified. On the basis of this finding, an unplanned hypothesis generating analysis adjusting for the PFI imbalance and other prognostic factors suggested an improvement in OS associated with the trabectedin+PLD arm (HR=0.82; 95%CI: 0.69-0.98; p=0.0285). In another unplanned exploratory analysis, the subset of patients with a PFI of 6-12 months had the largest difference in OS (HR=0.64; 95%CI: 0.47-0.86; p=0.0027). CONCLUSIONS: The final OS analysis did not meet the protocol-defined criterion for statistical significance. Despite stratification on platinum sensitivity, there was an imbalance in mean platinum free interval that had an effect on OS.

Circulating tumor cells predict progression free survival and overall survival in patients with relapsed/recurrent advanced ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Serial circulating tumor cell (CTC) counts have demonstrated predictive and prognostic value in patients with metastatic breast, colorectal, and prostate cancer. In a phase III study of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) with trabectedin vs. PLD for relapsed ovarian cancer, we evaluated the correlation, if any, between numbers of CTCs and progression free survival, (PFS) and overall survival (OS). METHODS: CTCs were isolated from peripheral blood (10 mL) using the CellSearch system and reagents (Veridex). A CTC is defined as EpCAM+, cytokeratin+, CD45-, and is positive for the nuclear stain DAPI. The normal reference range for CellSearch is <2 CTC/7.5 mL of blood. Hazard ratios adjusted for known prognostic factors were estimated by Cox regression. RESULTS: Two-hundred sixteen patients had baseline CTC measurements of which 111 (51.4%) were randomized to the trabectedin+PLD arm; 143/216 patients (66.2%) were platinum-sensitive. Thirty-one of 216 patients (14.4%) had 2 or more CTCs detected prior to the start of therapy (range 2-566). Univariate Cox regression analyses indicated that patients with ≥2 CTCs prior to therapy had 1.89- (p=0.003) and 2.06-fold (p=0.003) higher risk for progression and death respectively. Multivariate analyses that include baseline CA-125, platinum sensitivity status, largest diameter lesion, number of tumor lesions, ECOG PS, and tumor grade show that patients with elevated baseline CTC had 1.58- (p=0.058) and 1.54-fold (p=0.096) higher risk for progression and death respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Results from this study indicate that elevated numbers of CTCs impart an unfavorable prognosis for ovarian cancer patients.

Correlation between CA-125 serum level and response by RECIST in a phase III recurrent ovarian cancer study.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate in a large phase III recurrent ovarian cancer trial (OVA-301): 1) the concordance between CA-125 level vs. best overall response (OR) and progression-free survival (PFS) determined by radiological assessment 2) the impact of early CA-125 changes over the subsequent radiological response, and 3) the prognostic value of CA-125 response and CA-125 PFS to predict radiological response and PFS. METHODS: Assessment of response in the entire randomized population was performed by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.0 (RECIST) and modified Rustin criteria for CA-125 determination. RESULTS: Most CA-125 decreases were observed in RECIST responders (82% of patients treated with the combination and 74% in the PLD alone). CA-125 progression preceded RECIST progression in 35% of patients with a median lead time of 8.4 weeks. A high concordance rate between CA-125 PFS status at 4 months (PFS4) and CA-125 response as a predictor of PFS4 (87%) and radiological response (79%) was found in the combination, with high positive predictive value for radiological PFS4 (92%) and high negative predictive value for OR (90%). An early CA-125 decrease was predictive for the ultimate response since it was found in a high rate of RECIST responders. CONCLUSION: Radiological response was preceded by a favorable predictive CA-125 decrease in a high proportion of patients, suggesting that CA-125 evaluation may be an appropriate tool for tumor assessment in patients with ovarian cancer.

Trabectedin has a low cardiac risk profile: a comprehensive cardiac safety analysis.

PURPOSE: This analysis provides a cross-study evaluation of the cardiac safety of trabectedin. METHODS: Drug-related cardiac adverse events (CAEs) were retrieved from phase I-III clinical trials, pharmacovigilance databases, and spontaneously reported cases. Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was monitored in combination phase I studies with doxorubicin or pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) and in a phase III trial (with PLD). RESULTS: CAEs [grade 4 cardiac arrest with severe pancytopenia and sepsis (n = 1 patient), grade 4 atrial fibrillation (n = 2), and grade 1 tachycardia (n = 1)] occurred in 4/283 patients (1.4%) in 6 single-agent phase I trials. CAEs (grade 1 sinus tachycardia in a hypertensive patient and grade 1 ventricular dysfunction) occurred in 2/155 patients (1.3%) in 4 phase I combination trials. Results from 19 single-agent phase II trials showed CAEs in 20/1,132 patients (1.8%): arrhythmias (tachycardia/palpitations; n = 13; 1.1%) were the most common. A rather similar rate of symptomatic CAEs was observed in both arms of a phase III trial in recurrent ovarian cancer: 6/330 patients (1.8%; PLD) and 11/333 patients (3.3%; trabectedin/PLD). No clinically relevant LVEF changes occurred in phase I combination trials. In the phase III trial, LVEF decreases from baseline were similar: 9% of patients (PLD) and 7% (trabectedin/PLD), with no relevant symptoms. During postmarketing experience in soft tissue sarcoma (2,046 patients treated), 4 CAEs (2 cardiac arrest, 2 cardiac failure; ~0.2%) occurred in patients with preexisting conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Trabectedin has a low incidence of CAEs, consisting mainly of arrhythmias. This extensive data review indicates a low cardiac risk profile for trabectedin.

Randomized phase III study of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin plus bortezomib compared with bortezomib alone in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma: combination therapy improves time to progression.

PURPOSE: This phase III international study compared the efficacy and safety of a combination of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) plus bortezomib with bortezomib monotherapy in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Six hundred forty-six patients were randomly assigned to receive either intravenous bortezomib 1.3 mg/m(2) on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 of an every 21-days cycle, or the same bortezomib regimen with PLD 30 mg/m(2) on day 4. RESULTS: Median time to progression was increased from 6.5 months for bortezomib to 9.3 months with the PLD + bortezomib combination (P = .000004; hazard ratio, 1.82 [monotherapy v combination therapy]; 95% CI, 1.41 to 2.35). The 15-month survival rate for PLD + bortezomib was 76% compared with 65% for bortezomib alone (P = .03). The complete plus partial response rate was 41% for bortezomib and 44% for PLD + bortezomib, a difference that was not statistically significant. Median duration of response was increased from 7.0 to 10.2 months (P = .0008) with PLD + bortezomib. Grade 3/4 adverse events were more frequent in the combination group (80% v 64%), with safety profiles consistent with the known toxicities of the two agents. An increased incidence in the combination group was seen of grade 3/4 neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, asthenia, fatigue, diarrhea, and hand-foot syndrome. CONCLUSION: PLD with bortezomib is superior to bortezomib monotherapy for the treatment of patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. The combination therapy is associated with a higher incidence of grade 3/4 myelosuppression, constitutional symptoms, and GI and dermatologic toxicities.