Lanreotide Depot to Treat Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors in a US Community Oncology Setting: A Prospective, Observational Study.

INTRODUCTION: Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs) can result in symptoms such as diarrhea, flushing, abdominal pain, and fatigue and are often associated with a significant disease burden and poor prognosis. This non-interventional, prospective, observational study evaluated the real-world safety and effectiveness of lanreotide depot, a somatostatin analog (SSA) used to treat GEP-NETs, in a community setting. METHODS: In this prospective, non-interventional study (NCT02730104), adult patients with locally advanced (inoperable), metastatic GEP-NETs treated with lanreotide depot were evaluated by their physician every 6 months from enrollment for 24 months. Clinically defined time to disease progression (TTDP) and overall survival (OS) were estimated for the total population and by primary tumor type (gastrointestinal [GI], pancreatic, unknown origin), and an exploratory analysis determined the rate of progression-free survival (PFS) at 12 and 24 months. Patient satisfaction was evaluated via the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM-9), and safety information was recorded. RESULTS: Of 99 patients, the 24-month PFS rate was 73.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] 63.1-81.7) and 24-month OS rate was 84.2% (95% CI 74.0-90.7). Median TTDP was not reached because few patients experienced disease progression during the study period. The majority of responding patients expressed satisfaction with treatment on each domain of the TSQM-9. Treatment-related adverse events (AEs) occurred in 19.2% of patients, while no serious AEs (SAEs) were related to the study drug. CONCLUSIONS: Lanreotide depot is an effective and well-tolerated treatment for GEP-NETs in the real-world community setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02730104.

Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs) are rare tumors that develop in the gut or pancreas. GEP-NETs may lead to a reduced lifespan, and people with GEP-NETs may have symptoms such as fatigue, muscle weakness, diarrhea, stomach pain/cramping, and skin reactions. One approved treatment for patients whose tumor cannot be removed with surgery is lanreotide depot. Clinical trials have found lanreotide depot to be effective at prolonging survival and managing symptoms in people with GEP-NETs. However, clinical trials take place under very strict conditions and often do not represent all people with a certain disease in the 'real world'. It is important to determine whether treatments are still effective when used outside of clinical trials. This study was conducted in the real world and followed 99 people with GEP-NETs whose physicians were treating them with lanreotide depot. Each person was monitored for 24 months and assessed during check-ups by their physician every 6 months. After 24 months, 73.7% of people did not have progression (worsening) of disease. The percentage of people who had not died by the end of the study was 84.2%. Most patients (91.6%) said they were satisfied with their treatment. Only 19.2% of patients experienced side effects, none of which were serious.

Efficacy and Safety of Weekly Paclitaxel With or Without Oral Alisertib in Patients With Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Elevated expression of AURKA adversely affects prognosis in estrogen receptor (ER)-positive and ERBB2 (formerly HER2)-negative and triple-negative breast cancer and is associated with resistance to taxanes. Objective: To compare paclitaxel alone vs paclitaxel plus alisertib in patients with ER-positive and ERBB2-negative or triple-negative metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Design, Setting, and Participants: In this randomized clinical trial conducted with the US Oncology Network, participants were randomized to intravenous (IV) paclitaxel 90 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 on a 28-day cycle or IV paclitaxel 60 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 plus oral alisertib 40 mg twice daily on days 1 to 3, 8 to 10, and 15 to 17 on a 28-day cycle. Stratification was by prior neo or adjuvant taxane and by line of metastatic therapy. Eligible patients were those who had undergone endocrine therapy, 0 or 1 prior chemotherapy regimens for MBC, more than 12 months treatment-free interval from neo or adjuvant taxane therapy, and with measurable or evaluable lytic bone-disease. Data were analyzed from March 2019 through May 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was progression-free survival (PFS) with secondary end points of overall survival (OS), overall response rate, clinical benefit rate, safety, and analysis of archival breast cancer tissues for molecular markers associated with benefit from alisertib. Results: A total of 174 patients were randomized, including with 86 randomized to paclitaxel and 88 patients randomized to paclitaxel plus alisertib, and 169 patients received study treatment. The final cohort included 139 patients with a median (interquartile range [IQR]) age of 62 (27-84) years with ER-positive and ERBB2-negative MBC, with 70 randomized to paclitaxel and 69 randomized to paclitaxel plus alisertib. The TNBC cohort closed with only 35 patients enrolled due to slow accrual and were not included in efficacy analyses. The median (IQR) follow-up was 22 (10.6-25.1) months, and median (IQR) PFS was 10.2 (3.8-15.7) months with paclitaxel plus alisertib vs 7.1 (3.8-10.6) months with paclitaxel alone (HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.37-0.84; P = .005). Median (IQR) OS was 26.3 (12.4-37.2) months for patients who received paclitaxel plus alisertib vs 25.1 (11.0-31.4) months for paclitaxel alone (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.58-1.38; P = .61). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 56 patients (84.8%) receiving paclitaxel plus alisertib vs 34 patients (48.6%) receiving paclitaxel alone. The main grade 3 or 4 adverse events with paclitaxel plus alisertib vs paclitaxel alone were neutropenia (50 patients [59.5%] vs 14 patients [16.4%]), anemia (8 patients [9.5%] vs 1 patient [1.2%]), diarrhea (9 patients [10.7%] vs 0 patients), and stomatitis or oral mucositis (13 patients [15.5%] vs 0 patients). One patient receiving paclitaxel plus alisertib died of sepsis. Conclusions and Relevance: This randomized clinical trial found that the addition of oral alisertib to a reduced dose of weekly paclitaxel significantly improved PFS compared with paclitaxel alone, and toxic effects with paclitaxel plus alisertib were manageable with alisertib dose reduction. These data support further evaluation of alisertib in patients with ER-positive, ERBB2-negative MBC. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02187991.

Phase III trial of cetuximab, bevacizumab, and 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin vs. FOLFOX-bevacizumab in colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Cetuximab (C), alone or with irinotecan, demonstrates activity in irinotecan-refractory colorectal cancer (CRC). Activity of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), leucovorin (L), and bevacizumab (B), and preliminary data of cetuximab + bevacizumab, and toxicity profiles suggests that FOLF-CB (5-FU, L, C+B) may have activity with a favorable toxicity profile as first-line therapy. METHODS: Eligible patients were randomized at registration to either arm A (mFOLFOX6-B) (modified, 5-FU. L (folinic acid), oxaliplatin (O) + bevacizumab), administered days 1 and 15 of each 28-day cycle as bevacizumab 5 mg/kg, oxaliplatin 85 mg/m(2), leucovorin 400 mg/m(2), and 5-FU 400 mg/m(2) then 1200 mg/m(2)/day for 48 hours, or arm B (FOLF-CB), which included bevacizumab, leucovorin, and 5-FU as in arm A and cetuximab 400 mg/m(2) day 1 cycle 1; all other weekly cetuximab doses were 250 mg/m(2). RESULTS: Two hundred forty-seven patients (arm A/arm B 124/123) were enrolled, and 239 were treated (118/121). Twelve-month progression-free survival (PFS) was 45%/32%, objective response rates (ORR) (complete response [CR] + partial response [PR]) were 52%/41%, disease control rates (CR+PR+stable disease [SD]) were 87%/83%, and median overall survival (OS) was 21/19.5 months, respectively. Grade 3-4 neutropenia was higher in arm A (28%/7%), as was grade 3 fatigue (12%/3%), and grade 3 neuropathy (11%/< 1%), whereas acneiform rash was confined to arm B. Retrospective analysis of KRAS mutational status did not demonstrate KRAS as a meaningful determinant of activity, except in arm B patients with KRAS-mutated tumors, which resulted in inferior PFS. Patient satisfaction favored the control (mFOLFOX6-B). CONCLUSION: FOLF-CB was not superior to mFOLFOX6-B in terms of 12-month PFS and ORR, and was not more acceptable to patients. This trial supports the conclusion of other recently reported trials that concurrent cetuximab+bevacizumab should not be routinely used in metastatic CRC.