Survival outcomes in older men with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer treated with androgen receptor inhibitors: a US Food and Drug Administration pooled analysis of patient-level data from three randomised trials.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the benefit-risk profile of second-generation androgen receptor inhibitors in older men with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. We aimed to examine the efficacy and safety of second-generation androgen receptor inhibitors in men aged 80 years or older with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. METHODS: We searched for all randomised controlled clinical trials evaluating second-generation androgen receptor inhibitors in patients with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration before Aug 15, 2020, and pooled data from three trials that met the selection criteria. All three trials enrolled patients who were aged 18 years or older with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, castration-resistant prostate cancer, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) 2·0 µg/L or greater, PSA doubling time of 10 months or less, and no evidence of distant metastatic disease on conventional imaging per the investigator's assessment at the time of screening. All patients had histologically or cytologically confirmed adenocarcinoma of the prostate without neuroendocrine differentiation or small-cell features. All patients who were randomly assigned to androgen receptor inhibitor or placebo groups in these trials were considered assessable and were included in this pooled analysis. We evaluated the effect of age on metastasis-free survival and overall survival across age groups (<80 years vs ≥80 years) in the intention-to-treat population. Safety analyses were done in patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. FINDINGS: Between Oct 14, 2013, and March 9, 2018, 4117 patients were assigned to androgen receptor inhibitor (apalutamide, enzalutamide, or daralutamide; n=2694) or placebo (n=1423) across three randomised trials. The median follow-up duration for metastasis-free survival was 18 months (IQR 11-26) and for overall survival was 44 months (32-55). In patients aged 80 years or older (n=1023), the estimated median metastasis-free survival was 40 months (95% CI 36-41) in the androgen receptor inhibitor groups and 22 months (18-29) in the placebo groups (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·37 [95% CI 0·28-0·47]), and the median overall survival was 54 months (50-61) versus 49 months (43-58), respectively (adjusted HR 0·79 [0·64-0·98]). In patients younger than 80 years of age (n=3094), the estimated median metastasis-free survival was 41 months (95% CI 36-not estimable [NE]) in the androgen receptor inhibitor groups and 16 months (15-18) in the placebo groups (adjusted HR 0·31 [95% CI 0·27-0·35]), and the median overall survival was 74 months (74-NE) versus 61 months (56-NE), respectively (adjusted HR 0·69 [0·60-0·80]). In patients aged 80 years or older, grade 3 or worse adverse events were reported in 371 (55%) of 672 patients in the androgen receptor inhibitor groups and 140 (41%) of 344 patients in the placebo groups, compared with 878 (44%) of 2015 patients in the androgen receptor inhibitor groups and 321 (30%) of 1073 patients in the placebo groups among patients younger than 80 years. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were hypertension (168 [8%] of 2015 patients aged <80 years and 51 [8%] of 672 patients aged ≥80 years in the androgen receptor inhibitor groups vs 53 [5%] of 1073 patients aged <80 years and 22 [6%] of 344 patients aged ≥80 years in the placebo groups) and fracture (61 [3%] and 36 [5%] in the androgen receptor inhibitor groups vs 15 [1%] and 11 [3%] in the placebo groups). INTERPRETATION: The findings of this pooled analysis support the use of androgen receptor inhibitors in older men with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Incorporating geriatric assessment tools in the care of older adults with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer might help clinicians to offer individualised treatment to each patient. FUNDING: None.

Phase I/II trial of ruxolitinib in combination with trastuzumab in metastatic HER2 positive breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Preclinical data demonstrate STAT3 as an important regulator in HER2+ tumors, and disruption of the IL6-JAK2-STAT-S100A8/S100A9 signaling cascade reduces HER2+ cell viability. Ruxolitinib is an FDA approved inhibitor of JAK1 and JAK2. We performed a phase I/II trial investigating the safety and efficacy of the combination of trastuzumab and ruxolitinib in patients with trastuzumab-resistant metastatic HER2+ breast cancer. METHODS: Patients with metastatic HER2+ breast cancer progressing on at least 2 lines of HER2-directed therapy were eligible. The phase I portion determined the tolerable dose of ruxolitinib in combination with trastuzumab. The primary objective of the phase II was to assess the progression free survival (PFS) of the combination of ruxolitinib plus trastuzumab compared to historical control. RESULTS: Twenty-eight patients were enrolled, with a median number of prior therapies of 4.5. Ruxolitinib 25 mg twice daily was the recommended phase II dose with no dose limiting toxicities (DLTs). Of 26 evaluable patients in phase II, the median PFS was 8.3 weeks (95% CI 7.1, 13.9). Among the 14 patients with measurable disease, 1 patient had a partial response and 4 patients had stable disease. Most of the adverse events were hematologic. CONCLUSION: While well tolerated with a strong preclinical rationale, the combination of ruxolitinib and trastuzumab did not lead to an improvement in PFS compared to historical control in patients with trastuzumab-resistant metastatic HER2+ breast cancer.

An FDA Review of Drug Development in Nonmetastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer.

The FDA has approved three androgen receptor inhibitors-enzalutamide, apalutamide, and darolutamide-for the treatment of patients with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC). These approvals were all based on randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled trials demonstrating large improvements in metastasis-free survival (MFS) and internally consistent evidence of benefit seen across secondary endpoints. In this article, we summarize the FDA regulatory history of MFS and we describe the design, conduct, and results of the three pivotal trials supporting these important treatment options for patients with nmCRPC.

Patients with melanoma treated with an anti-PD-1 antibody beyond RECIST progression: a US Food and Drug Administration pooled analysis.

BACKGROUND: Patients who receive immunotherapeutic drugs might develop an atypical response pattern, wherein they initially meet conventional response criteria for progressive disease but later have decreases in tumour burden. Such responses warrant further investigation into the potential benefits and risks for patients who continue immunotherapy beyond disease progression defined by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1. METHODS: For this pooled analysis, we included all submissions of trial reports and data to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in support of marketing applications for anti-programmed death receptor-1 (PD-1) antibodies (alone or in combination) for the treatment of patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma that allowed for continuation of the antibody beyond RECIST-defined progression in the anti-PD-1 group and were approved by FDA before Jan 1, 2017. To investigate the effect of treatment beyond progression in patients with metastatic melanoma and to better characterise which of these patients would benefit from extended treatment, we pooled individual patient data from patients who received at least one dose of an anti-PD-1 antibody in the included trials. We included any patient receiving the anti-PD-1 antibody after their RECIST-defined progression date in the treatment beyond progression cohort and analysed them descriptively at baseline and at time of progression versus the cohort not receiving treatment beyond progression. We analysed the target lesion response after progression in patients in the treatment beyond progression cohort relative to progressive disease and baseline target lesion burden. We defined a treatment beyond progression response as a decrease in target lesion tumour burden (sum of the reference diameters) of at least 30% from the burden at the time of RECIST-defined progression that did not require confirmation at a subsequent assessment. We also compared individual timepoint responses, overall survival, and adverse events in the treatment beyond progression versus no treatment beyond progression cohorts. FINDINGS: Among the eight multicentre clinical trials meeting this study's inclusion criteria, we pooled the data from 2624 patients receiving immunotherapy. 1361 (52%) had progressive disease, of whom 692 (51%) received continued anti-PD-1 antibody treatment beyond RECIST-defined progression and 669 (49%) did not. 95 (19%) of 500 patients in the treatment beyond progresssion cohort with evaluable assessments had a 30% or more decrease in tumour burden, when considering burden at RECIST-defined progression as the reference point, representing 14% of the 692 patients treated beyond progression and 4% of all 2624 patients treated with immunotherapy. Median overall survival in patients with RECIST-defined progressive disease given anti-PD-1 antibody was longer in the treatment beyond progression cohort (24·4 months, 95% CI 21·2-26·3) than in the cohort of patients who did not receive treatment beyond progression (11·2 months, 10·1-12·9). 362 (54%) of 669 patients in the no treatment beyond progression cohort had a serious adverse event up to 90 days after treatment discontinuation compared with 295 (43%) of 692 patients in the treatment beyond progression cohort. Immune-related adverse events that occurred up to 90 days from discontinuation were similar between the treatment beyond progression cohort (78 [11%] of 692 patients) and the no treatment beyond progression cohort (106 [16%] of 669). INTERPRETATION: Continuation of treatment beyond progression in the product labelling of these immunotherapies has not been recommended because the clinical benefit remains to be proven. Treatment beyond progression with anti-PD-1 antibody therapy might be appropriate for selected patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma, identified by specific criteria at the time of progression, based on the potential for late responses in the setting of the known toxicity profile. FUNDING: None.

FDA Approval Summary: Trabectedin for Unresectable or Metastatic Liposarcoma or Leiomyosarcoma Following an Anthracycline-Containing Regimen.

On October 23, 2015, the FDA approved trabectedin, a new molecular entity for the treatment of patients with unresectable or metastatic liposarcoma or leiomyosarcoma who received a prior anthracycline-containing regimen. Approval was based on results of a single, randomized, active-controlled, 518-patient, multicenter study comparing the safety and efficacy of trabectedin 1.5 mg/m2 as a 24-hour continuous intravenous (i.v.) infusion once every 3 weeks with dacarbazine 1,000 mg/m2 i.v. once every 3 weeks. Treatment with trabectedin resulted in a statistically significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS), with a PFS of 4.2 months and 1.5 months for trabectedin and dacarbazine, respectively (HR, 0.55; 95% confidence interval, 0.44-0.70; unstratified log-rank test, P < 0.001). The most common adverse reactions (≥20%) were nausea, fatigue, vomiting, constipation, decreased appetite, diarrhea, peripheral edema, dyspnea, and headache. Serious adverse reactions included anaphylaxis, neutropenic sepsis, rhabdomyolysis, hepatotoxicity, cardiomyopathy, and extravasation resulting in tissue necrosis. A postmarketing trial was required to evaluate the serious risk of cardiomyopathy. This approval provides another treatment option in a setting where no drug has been shown to improve overall survival. A key regulatory consideration during review of this application was the use of PFS as an endpoint to support regular approval of trabectedin. Clin Cancer Res; 23(24); 7448-53. ©2017 AACR.

Gemcitabine-induced pulmonary toxicity.

BACKGROUND: Gemcitabine is the only approved cytotoxic agent for the treatment of pancreatic cancer by the Food and Drug Administration. In addition, gemcitabine is also commonly used for the management of breast, ovarian, and non-small cell lung cancer. Myelosuppression is the most common toxicity of gemcitabine therapy. Pulmonary toxicities due to gemcitabine have, however, been reported. Dyspnea occurs in approximately 25% of patients treated with gemcitabine, whereas serious pulmonary toxicities are much less common, approximately 0.3%. Here, we present a case of gemcitabine-induced pneumonitis, encountered during treatment of pancreatic cancer, and review the literature of this rare, but dangerous complication. CASE REPORT: A 56-year old male being treated for stage IV pancreatic cancer developed progressive dyspnea on exertion, chest tightness, and palpitations. Oxygen saturation was 82-84%. Computerized-tomography (CT) angiography of the chest demonstrated new diffuse groundglass opacities in the bilateral lower lobes when compared to the CT of the chest without intravenous contrast, 5 weeks prior. Mild to moderate emphysema was also seen, but no pulmonary emboli were detected. Myocardial infraction was ruled-out by normal electrocardiogram and normal cardiac biomarkers. CONCLUSION: We report another case of gemcitabine-induced pneumonitis. Physicians seeing such patients should be aware of this rare but real pulmonary toxicity. A delay in diagnosis and treatment can lead to potentially fatal outcomes.