Second-line lenvatinib in patients with recurrent endometrial cancer.

OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the efficacy of lenvatinib, a multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor, as second-line therapy in patients with unresectable endometrial cancer. The primary end point was the objective response rate (ORR) as assessed by independent radiologic review (IRR). Secondary end points included median progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and clinical benefit rate. Exploratory end points examined the association of baseline levels of plasma biomarkers (50 circulating cytokine and/or angiogenic factors measured by immunoassays) with efficacy outcomes. METHODS: An international, open-label, single-arm, multicenter, phase 2 trial was conducted. Eligible patients had histologically confirmed unresectable endometrial cancer that relapsed after 1 prior systemic platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients received once-daily oral lenvatinib 24 mg in a 28-day dosing cycle. RESULTS: There were 133 patients in the study. By IRR, 19 patients had a confirmed objective response for an ORR of 14.3% (95% CI: 8.8-21.4). Durable stable disease (≥23 weeks) was observed in 31 patients (23.3%) and the clinical benefit rate was 37.6% (95% CI: 29.3-46.4). Median PFS was 5.6 months (95% CI: 3.7-6.3), and median OS was 10.6 months (95% CI: 8.9-14.9). The most common (any grade) treatment-related adverse events were fatigue/asthenia (48%), hypertension (49%), nausea/vomiting (32%), decreased appetite (32%), and diarrhea (31%). Lower baseline levels of angiopoietin-2 were associated with longer PFS, OS, and a higher ORR. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with recurrent endometrial cancer treated with second-line lenvatinib experienced modest antitumor activity and treatment was generally well tolerated, with a safety profile consistent with previous studies.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 1b/2 study of ralimetinib, a p38 MAPK inhibitor, plus gemcitabine and carboplatin versus gemcitabine and carboplatin for women with recurrent platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVE: This phase 1b/2 clinical trial (NCT01663857) evaluated the efficacy of ralimetinib in combination with gemcitabine (G) and carboplatin (C), followed by maintenance ralimetinib, for patients with recurrent platinum-sensitive epithelial ovarian cancer. METHODS: Phase 1b was to determine the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of ralimetinib administered Q12H on Days 1-10 (q21d) in combination with G (1000 mg/m2, Days 3 and 10) and C (AUC 4, Day 3) for six cycles. In phase 2, patients were randomized double-blind 1:1 to ralimetinib (R)+GC or placebo (P)+GC, for six cycles, followed by ralimetinib 300 mg Q12H or placebo on Days 1-14, q28d. RESULTS: 118 patients received at least one dose of ralimetinib or placebo; eight in phase 1b and 110 in phase 2 (R+GC, N = 58; P+GC, N = 52). The RP2D for R+GC was 200 mg Q12H. The study met its primary objective of a statistically significant difference in PFS (median: R+GC, 10.3 mo vs. P+GC, 7.9 mo; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.773, P = 0.2464, against a two-sided false positive rate of 0.4). Secondary objectives were not statistically significant for median overall survival (R+GC, 29.2 mo vs. P+GC, 25.1 mo; HR = 0.827, P = 0.4686) or overall response rate (R+GC 46.6% vs. P+GC, 46.2%; P = 0.9667). The safety profile of R+GC therapy was mainly consistent with safety of the chemotherapy backbone alone. Grade 3/4 elevated alanine aminotransferase was more common in the ralimetinib arm. CONCLUSIONS: Addition of ralimetinib to GC resulted in a modest improvement in PFS.

A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Phase III Study to Assess Efficacy and Safety of Weekly Farletuzumab in Combination With Carboplatin and Taxane in Patients With Ovarian Cancer in First Platinum-Sensitive Relapse.

PURPOSE: Farletuzumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody that binds to folate receptor-α, which is highly expressed in ovarian carcinoma and largely absent from normal tissue. Farletuzumab was investigated in a double-blind, randomized phase III study in platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients had first recurrent ovarian cancer 6-24 months following completion of platinum-taxane chemotherapy. All patients received carboplatin plus paclitaxel or docetaxel (for six cycles combined with randomly assigned test products in a 1:1:1 ratio: farletuzumab 1.25 mg/kg, farletuzumab 2.5 mg/kg, or placebo). The single-agent test product was continued weekly until disease progression. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. Additional analyses not outlined in the original protocol were prespecified in the final statistical analysis plan, including a subgroup analysis by baseline CA-125 and farletuzumab exposure levels. RESULTS: A total of 1,100 women were randomly assigned to treatment dose or placebo. PFS from the primary analysis was 9.0, 9.5, and 9.7 months for the placebo, farletuzumab 1.25 mg/kg, and farletuzumab 2.5 mg/kg groups, respectively. Neither farletuzumab group was statistically different from the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.99 [95% CI, 0.81 to 1.21] and 0.86 [95% CI, 0.70 to 1.06] for farletuzumab 1.25 mg/kg and 2.5 mg/kg group v placebo, respectively). In the prespecified subgroup, baseline CA-125 levels not more than three times the upper limit of normal (ULN) correlated with longer PFS (HR, 0.49; P = .0028) and overall survival (OS) (HR, 0.44; P = .0108) for farletuzumab 2.5 mg/kg versus placebo. Subgroup analysis of farletuzumab exposure above the median, regardless of dose, showed significantly better PFS versus placebo. The most common adverse events were those associated with chemotherapy. CONCLUSION: Neither farletuzumab dose met the study's primary PFS end point. Prespecified subgroup analyses demonstrated that patients with CA-125 levels not more than three times the ULN and patients with higher farletuzumab exposure showed superior PFS and OS compared with placebo.

PRECEDENT: a randomized phase II trial comparing vintafolide (EC145) and pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) in combination versus PLD alone in patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer.

PURPOSE: Vintafolide (EC145) is a folic acid-desacetylvinblastine conjugate that binds to the folate receptor (FR), which is expressed on the majority of epithelial ovarian cancers. This randomized phase II trial evaluated vintafolide combined with pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) compared with PLD alone. The utility of an FR-targeted imaging agent, (99m)Tc-etarfolatide (EC20), in selecting patients likely to benefit from vintafolide was also examined. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Women with recurrent platinum-resistant ovarian cancer who had undergone ≤ two prior cytotoxic regimens were randomly assigned at a 2:1 ratio to PLD (50 mg/m(2) intravenously [IV] once every 28 days) with or without vintafolide (2.5 mg IV three times per week during weeks 1 and 3). Etarfolatide scanning was optional. The primary objective was to compare progression-free survival (PFS) between the groups. RESULTS: The intent-to-treat population comprised 149 patients. Median PFS was 5.0 and 2.7 months for the vintafolide plus PLD and PLD-alone arms, respectively (hazard ratio [HR], 0.63; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.96; P = .031). The greatest benefit was observed in patients with 100% of lesions positive for FR, with median PFS of 5.5 compared with 1.5 months for PLD alone (HR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.17 to 0.85; P = .013). The group of patients with FR-positive disease (10% to 90%) experienced some PFS improvement (HR, 0.873), whereas patients with disease that did not express FR experienced no PFS benefit (HR, 1.806). CONCLUSION: Vintafolide plus PLD is the first combination to demonstrate an improvement over standard therapy in a randomized trial of patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. Etarfolatide can identify patients likely to benefit from vintafolide.

OCEANS: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III trial of chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab in patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent epithelial ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancer.

PURPOSE: This randomized, multicenter, blinded, placebo-controlled phase III trial tested the efficacy and safety of bevacizumab (BV) with gemcitabine and carboplatin (GC) compared with GC in platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancer (ROC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with platinum-sensitive ROC (recurrence ≥ 6 months after front-line platinum-based therapy) and measurable disease were randomly assigned to GC plus either BV or placebo (PL) for six to 10 cycles. BV or PL, respectively, was then continued until disease progression. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) by RECIST; secondary end points were objective response rate, duration of response (DOR), overall survival, and safety. RESULTS: Overall, 484 patients were randomly assigned. PFS for the BV arm was superior to that for the PL arm (hazard ratio [HR], 0.484; 95% CI, 0.388 to 0.605; log-rank P < .0001); median PFS was 12.4 v 8.4 months, respectively. The objective response rate (78.5% v 57.4%; P < .0001) and DOR (10.4 v 7.4 months; HR, 0.534; 95% CI, 0.408 to 0.698) were significantly improved with the addition of BV. No new safety concerns were noted. Grade 3 or higher hypertension (17.4% v < 1%) and proteinuria (8.5% v < 1%) occurred more frequently in the BV arm. The rates of neutropenia and febrile neutropenia were similar in both arms. Two patients in the BV arm experienced GI perforation after study treatment discontinuation. CONCLUSION: GC plus BV followed by BV until progression resulted in a statistically significant improvement in PFS compared with GC plus PL in platinum-sensitive ROC.

Phase III trial of induction gemcitabine or paclitaxel plus carboplatin followed by paclitaxel consolidation in ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVE: The safety and efficacy of gemcitabine plus carboplatin (GC) or paclitaxel plus carboplatin (TC) induction regimens with or without paclitaxel consolidation therapy were assessed in ovarian cancer (OC). METHODS: Patients with stage IC-IV OC were randomized to either GC (gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2), days 1 and 8, plus carboplatin area under the curve [AUC] 5, day 1) or TC (paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) plus carboplatin AUC 6, day 1) every 21 days for up to six cycles. Patients with complete response (CR) were allowed optional consolidation with paclitaxel 135 mg/m(2) every 28 days for ≤ 12 months. Patients without CR received single-agent crossover therapy at induction doses/schedules until CR, disease progression (PD), or unacceptable toxicity. PD or death in 636 patients was required to compare induction arms with 80% statistical power for progression-free survival (PFS), the primary endpoint. RESULTS: Randomized induction therapy was received by 820 of 919 patients enrolled; 352 patients with CR received paclitaxel consolidation whereas 155 patients without CR received single-agent crossover therapy. PFS was similar for GC and TC (median, 20.0 and 22.2 months, respectively; P=.199). Despite high censoring rates (>52%), overall survival was longer for TC (median, 57.3 versus 43.8 months for GC; P=.013). Controlling for patient characteristics including performance status, residual tumor size, and tumor stage, there was no statistical difference in a multivariate analysis (HR=1.22; 95% CI=0.99-1.52; P=.067). CONCLUSIONS: GC does not improve PFS over TC as first-line induction chemotherapy in OC. Although favoring TC, overall survival analyses were limited by the study design and high censoring rates.

Phase II evaluation of nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel in platinum-sensitive patients with recurrent ovarian, peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancer.

PURPOSE: Patients with recurrent ovarian, peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancer have limited therapeutic options. There are no reports of nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel (nab-paclitaxel) in patients with recurrent platinum-sensitive disease. We report efficacy and toxicity with nab-paclitaxel in this group. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty-seven patients enrolled (44 assessable patients). Main inclusion criteria were histologically or cytologically confirmed epithelial cancer of the ovary, fallopian tube, or peritoneum (any stage, grade 2 to 3 if stage I) and measurable disease according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) or elevated CA-125 (> 70 U/mL) in patients without measurable disease. Patients received nab-paclitaxel 260 mg/m(2) administered intravenously for 30 minutes on day 1 of a 21-day cycle for six cycles or until disease progression. RESULTS: Median age was 65.5 years; 76% of patients had stage IIIC or IV disease, 81% had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0, and 94% had prior surgery. For assessable patients, the objective response rate (ORR) was 64% (15 complete responses [CR] and 13 partial responses [PR] among 44 assessable patients). In patients evaluated with RECIST only, the ORR was 45% (one CR and four PR of 11 patients). In patients with only elevated CA-125, ORR was 82% (seven CRs and two PRs of 11 patients). In patients meeting both RECIST and CA-125 criteria, the ORR was 64% (seven CRs and seven PRs of 22 patients). Median time to response was 1.3 months (range, 0.5 to 4.8 months). Estimated median progression-free survival was 8.5 months. The most frequent grade 3 to 4 treatment-related toxicities were neutropenia (24%) and neuropathy (9%). CONCLUSION: Nab-paclitaxel is active in this group of patients with recurrent ovarian, peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancer. The ORR was 64%. Toxicities were manageable. Further studies of nab-paclitaxel in combination with platinum are warranted.

Randomized phase III trial of gemcitabine compared with pegylated liposomal doxorubicin in patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer.

PURPOSE: Ovarian cancer (OC) patients experiencing progressive disease (PD) within 6 months of platinum-based therapy in the primary setting are considered platinum resistant (Pt-R). Currently, pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) is a standard of care for treatment of recurrent Pt-R disease. On the basis of promising phase II results, gemcitabine was compared with PLD for efficacy and safety in taxane-pretreated Pt-R OC patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients (n = 195) with Pt-R OC were randomly assigned to either gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 (days 1 and 8; every 21 days) or PLD 50 mg/m2 (day 1; every 28 days) until PD or undue toxicity. Optional cross-over therapy was allowed at PD or at withdrawal because of toxicity. Primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Additional end points included tumor response, time to treatment failure, survival, and quality of life. RESULTS: In the gemcitabine and PLD groups, median PFS was 3.6 v 3.1 months; median overall survival was 12.7 v 13.5 months; overall response rate (ORR) was 6.1% v 8.3%; and in the subset of patients with measurable disease, ORR was 9.2% v 11.7%, respectively. None of the efficacy end points showed a statistically significant difference between treatment groups. The PLD group experienced significantly more hand-foot syndrome and mucositis; the gemcitabine group experienced significantly more constipation, nausea/vomiting, fatigue, and neutropenia but not febrile neutropenia. CONCLUSION: Although this was not designed as an equivalency study, gemcitabine and PLD seem to have a comparable therapeutic index in this population of Pt-R taxane-pretreated OC patients. Single-agent gemcitabine may be an acceptable alternative to PLD for patients with Pt-R OC.

Phase I study of alternating doublets of topotecan/carboplatin and paclitaxel/carboplatin in patients with newly diagnosed, advanced ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate topotecan with carboplatin in an alternating doublet with carboplatin and paclitaxel in first-line ovarian cancer. METHODS: Patients with newly diagnosed stage III/IV ovarian cancer were studied. The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of topotecan (cycles 1, 3, 5, 7) in an alternating doublet regimen was determined through standard dose escalation in cohorts of three; doses of carboplatin (area under the curve [AUC] 4 to 5) and paclitaxel (175 mg/m(2), cycles 2, 4, 6, 8) were fixed. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was defined only for cycle 1 as febrile neutropenia, prolonged grade 4 granulocytopenia, grade 4 thrombocytopenia, > or =grade 3 nonhematologic toxicity, or failure to recover in < or =7 days. The use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) to permit further dose escalation was also studied. RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients received 142 cycles of topotecan/carboplatin. Hematologic DLTs included grade 4 neutropenia (59 events, 42% of cycles) and thrombocytopenia (32 events, 23% of cycles). Granulocytopenia was generally short-lived, and only 2 cases of febrile neutropenia occurred. The MTD was 1.0 mg/m(2)/day topotecan and carboplatin AUC 4, alternating with 175 mg/m(2) paclitaxel and carboplatin AUC 4. Although G-CSF effectively managed myelosuppression, thrombocytopenia developed in later cycles, limiting further topotecan dose escalation. The median progression-free survival was 20.5 months, and elevated pretreatment CA-125 levels normalized in 29 of 34 (85%) patients. CONCLUSION: The establishment of a reasonably well-tolerated alternating doublet regimen, coupled with evidence of antitumor activity, provides the basis for further investigation of topotecan in first-line therapy of ovarian cancer. Topotecan (1.0 mg/m(2) daily for 3 days) was chosen for further evaluation in a phase II study.