Bevacizumab in Combination With Oxaliplatin-Based Chemotherapy As First-Line Therapy in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Randomized Phase III Study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of bevacizumab when added to first-line oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy (either capecitabine plus oxaliplatin [XELOX] or fluorouracil/folinic acid plus oxaliplatin [FOLFOX-4]) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with MCRC were randomly assigned, in a 2 × 2 factorial design, to XELOX versus FOLFOX-4, and then to bevacizumab versus placebo. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: A total of 1,401 patients were randomly assigned in this 2 × 2 analysis. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 9.4 months in the bevacizumab group and 8.0 months in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.83; 97.5% CI, 0.72 to 0.95; P = .0023). Median overall survival was 21.3 months in the bevacizumab group and 19.9 months in the placebo group (HR, 0.89; 97.5% CI, 0.76 to 1.03; P = .077). Response rates were similar in both arms. Analysis of treatment withdrawals showed that, despite protocol allowance of treatment continuation until disease progression, only 29% and 47% of bevacizumab and placebo recipients, respectively, were treated until progression. The toxicity profile of bevacizumab was consistent with that documented in previous trials. CONCLUSION: The addition of bevacizumab to oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy significantly improved PFS in this first-line trial in patients with MCRC. Overall survival differences did not reach statistical significance, and response rate was not improved by the addition of bevacizumab. Treatment continuation until disease progression may be necessary in order to optimize the contribution of bevacizumab to therapy.

Prognostic and predictive value of AJCC-8 staging in the phase III EORTC1325/KEYNOTE-054 trial of pembrolizumab vs placebo in resected high-risk stage III melanoma.

BACKGROUND: The American Joint Committee on Cancer-8 (AJCC) classification of melanoma was implemented in January 2018. It was based on data gathered when checkpoint inhibitors were not used as adjuvant therapy in stage III melanoma. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) 1325/KEYNOTE-054 double-blind phase III trial evaluated pembrolizumab vs placebo in AJCC-7 stage IIIA (excluding lymph node metastasis ≤1 mm), IIIB or IIIC (without in-transit metastasis) patients after complete lymphadenectomy. PATIENTS, METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients (n = 1019) were randomised 1:1 to pembrolizumab 200 mg or placebo every 3 weeks (total of 18 doses, ∼1 year). At 1.25-year median follow-up, pembrolizumab prolonged relapse-free survival (RFS) in the total population (1-year RFS rate: 75.4% vs 61.0%; hazard ratio [HR] 0.57; logrank P < 0.0001) and consistently in the AJCC-7 subgroups. Prognostic and predictive values of AJCC-8 for RFS were evaluated in this study. Patient distribution according to the AJCC-8 stage subgroups was 8% (IIIA), 34.7% (IIIB), 49.7% (IIIC), 3.7% (IIID) and 3.8% (unknown). AJCC-8 classification was strongly associated with RFS (HRs for stage IIIB, IIIC and IIID vs IIIA were 4.0, 5.7 and 12.2, respectively) but showed no predictive importance for the treatment comparison regarding RFS (test for interaction: P = 0.68). The 1-year RFS rate for pembrolizumab vs placebo and the HRs (99% confidence interval) within each AJCC-8 subgroup were as follows: stage IIIA (92.7% vs 92.5%; 0.76 [0.11-5.43]), IIIB (79.0% vs 65.5%; 0.59 [0.35-0.99]), IIIC (73.6% vs 53.9%; 0.48 [0.33-0.70]) and IIID (50.0% vs 33.3%; 0.69 [0.24-2.00]). CONCLUSIONS: AJCC-8 staging had a strong prognostic importance for RFS but no predictive importance: the RFS benefit of pembrolizumab was observed across AJCC-8 subgroups in resected high-risk stage III melanoma patients.

Adjuvant Pembrolizumab versus Placebo in Resected Stage III Melanoma.

BACKGROUND: The programmed death 1 (PD-1) inhibitor pembrolizumab has been found to prolong progression-free and overall survival among patients with advanced melanoma. We conducted a phase 3 double-blind trial to evaluate pembrolizumab as adjuvant therapy in patients with resected, high-risk stage III melanoma. METHODS: Patients with completely resected stage III melanoma were randomly assigned (with stratification according to cancer stage and geographic region) to receive 200 mg of pembrolizumab (514 patients) or placebo (505 patients) intravenously every 3 weeks for a total of 18 doses (approximately 1 year) or until disease recurrence or unacceptable toxic effects occurred. Recurrence-free survival in the overall intention-to-treat population and in the subgroup of patients with cancer that was positive for the PD-1 ligand (PD-L1) were the primary end points. Safety was also evaluated. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 15 months, pembrolizumab was associated with significantly longer recurrence-free survival than placebo in the overall intention-to-treat population (1-year rate of recurrence-free survival, 75.4% [95% confidence interval {CI}, 71.3 to 78.9] vs. 61.0% [95% CI, 56.5 to 65.1]; hazard ratio for recurrence or death, 0.57; 98.4% CI, 0.43 to 0.74; P<0.001) and in the subgroup of 853 patients with PD-L1-positive tumors (1-year rate of recurrence-free survival, 77.1% [95% CI, 72.7 to 80.9] in the pembrolizumab group and 62.6% [95% CI, 57.7 to 67.0] in the placebo group; hazard ratio, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.69; P<0.001). Adverse events of grades 3 to 5 that were related to the trial regimen were reported in 14.7% of the patients in the pembrolizumab group and in 3.4% of patients in the placebo group. There was one treatment-related death due to myositis in the pembrolizumab group. CONCLUSIONS: As adjuvant therapy for high-risk stage III melanoma, 200 mg of pembrolizumab administered every 3 weeks for up to 1 year resulted in significantly longer recurrence-free survival than placebo, with no new toxic effects identified. (Funded by Merck; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02362594 ; EudraCT number, 2014-004944-37 .).

HannaH phase III randomised study: Association of total pathological complete response with event-free survival in HER2-positive early breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant-adjuvant trastuzumab after 2 years of treatment-free follow-up.

BACKGROUND: In the phase III, open-label, randomised HannaH study, fixed-dose neoadjuvant-adjuvant subcutaneous trastuzumab for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive early breast cancer was non-inferior to standard weight-based intravenous infusion in terms of serum trough concentration and pathological complete response (pCR). Evidence suggests that pCR, particularly total pCR (tpCR), is likely to predict clinical benefit. We report associations between tpCR and event-free survival (EFS) from HannaH (the largest population from a single study of patients presenting with newly diagnosed HER2-positive breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant-adjuvant trastuzumab to date) plus long-term efficacy and safety. METHODS: Eligible patients received four cycles of neoadjuvant docetaxel followed by four cycles of fluorouracil/epirubicin/cyclophosphamide administered concurrently with 3-weekly subcutaneous (600 mg fixed dose) or intravenous trastuzumab (8 mg/kg loading, 6 mg/kg maintenance doses). Post-surgery, patients received adjuvant trastuzumab as randomised to complete 1 year of standard treatment. In exploratory analyses, we used Cox regression to assess associations between tpCR and EFS. EFS rates per subgroup were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. FINDINGS: Three-year EFS rates were 76% for subcutaneous and 73% for intravenous trastuzumab (unstratified hazard ratio [HR] 0.95, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.69-1.30; intention-to-treat population). Three-year overall survival rates were 92% for subcutaneous and 90% for intravenous trastuzumab (unstratified HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.44-1.32). tpCR was associated with a reduced risk of an EFS event: subcutaneous arm HR 0.38 (95% CI 0.22-0.65); intravenous arm HR 0.32 (95% CI 0.18-0.60). Results were similar for subgroups, including oestrogen receptor status. The few additional adverse events occurring during treatment-free follow-up were balanced between arms. INTERPRETATION: Long-term efficacy supports the established non-inferiority of subcutaneous trastuzumab, and its safety profile remains consistent with the known intravenous profile. In each of HannaH's treatment arms, tpCR was associated with improved EFS, adding to evidence that tpCR is associated with clinical benefit in HER2-positive early breast cancer.

Comparison of dabrafenib and trametinib combination therapy with vemurafenib monotherapy on health-related quality of life in patients with unresectable or metastatic cutaneous BRAF Val600-mutation-positive melanoma (COMBI-v): results of a phase 3, open-label, randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: In the COMBI-v trial, patients with previously untreated BRAF Val600Glu or Val600Lys mutant unresectable or metastatic melanoma who were treated with the combination of dabrafenib and trametinib had significantly longer overall and progression-free survival than those treated with vemurafenib alone. Here, we present the effects of treatments on health-related quality of life (HRQoL), an exploratory endpoint in the COMBI-v study. METHODS: COMBI-v was an open-label, randomised phase 3 study in which 704 patients with metastatic melanoma with a BRAF Val600 mutation were randomly assigned (1:1) by an interactive voice response system to receive either a combination of dabrafenib (150 mg twice-daily) and trametinib (2 mg once-daily) or vemurafenib monotherapy (960 mg twice-daily) orally as first-line therapy. The primary endpoint was overall survival. In this pre-specified exploratory analysis, we prospectively assessed HRQoL in the intention-to-treat population with the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer quality of life (EORTC QLQ-C30), EuroQoL-5D (EQ-5D), and Melanoma Subscale of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Melanoma (FACT-M), completed at baseline, during study treatment, at disease progression, and after progression. We used a mixed-model, repeated measures ANCOVA to assess differences in mean scores between groups with baseline score as covariate; all p-values are descriptive. The COMBI-v trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01597908, and is ongoing for the primary endpoint, but is not recruiting patients. FINDINGS: From June 4, 2012, to Oct 7, 2013, 1645 patients at 193 centres worldwide were screened for eligibility, and 704 patients were randomly assigned to dabrafenib plus trametinib (n=352) or vemurafenib (n=352). Questionnaire completion rates for both groups were high (>95% at baseline, >80% at follow-up assessments, and >70% at disease progression) with similar HRQoL and symptom scores reported at baseline in both treatment groups for all questionnaires. Differences in mean scores between treatment groups were significant and clinically meaningful in favour of the combination compared with vemurafenib monotherapy for most domains across all three questionnaires during study treatment and at disease progression, including EORTC QLQ-C30 global health (7·92, 7·62, 6·86, 7·47, 5·16, 7·56, and 7·57 at weeks 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, and disease progression, respectively; p<0·001 for all assessments except p=0·005 at week 40), EORTC QLQ-C30 pain (-13·20, -8·05, -8·82, -12·69, -12·46, -11·41, and -10·57 at weeks 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, and disease progression, respectively; all p<0·001), EQ-5D thermometer scores (7·96, 8·05, 6·83, 11·53, 7·41, 9·08, and 10·51 at weeks 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, and disease progression, respectively; p<0·001 for all assessments except p=0·006 at week 32), and FACT-M Melanoma Subscale score (3·62, 2·93, 2·45, 3·39, 2·85, 3·00, and 3·68 at weeks 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, and disease progression, respectively; all p<0·001). INTERPRETATION: From the patient's perspective, which integrates not only survival advantage but also disease-associated and adverse-event-associated symptoms, treatment with the combination of a BRAF inhibitor plus a MEK inhibitor (dabrafenib plus trametinib) adds a clear benefit over monotherapy with the BRAF inhibitor vemurafenib and supports the combination therapy as standard of care in this population.

Neoadjuvant and adjuvant trastuzumab in patients with HER2-positive locally advanced breast cancer (NOAH): follow-up of a randomised controlled superiority trial with a parallel HER2-negative cohort.

BACKGROUND: In our randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial NeOAdjuvant Herceptin (NOAH) trial in women with HER2-positive locally advanced or inflammatory breast cancer, neoadjuvant trastuzumab significantly improved pathological complete response rate and event-free survival. We report updated results from our primary analysis to establish the long-term benefit of trastuzumab-containing neoadjuvant therapy. METHODS: We did this multicentre, open-label, randomised trial in women with HER2-positive locally advanced or inflammatory breast cancer. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1), by computer program with a minimisation technique, to receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone or with 1 year of trastuzumab (concurrently with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and continued after surgery). A parallel group with HER2-negative disease was included and received neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone. Our primary endpoint was event-free survival. Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered at www.controlled-trials.com, ISRCTN86043495. FINDINGS: Between June 20, 2002, and Dec 12, 2005, we enrolled 235 patients with HER2-positive disease, of whom 118 received chemotherapy alone and 117 received chemotherapy plus trastuzumab. 99 additional patients with HER2-negative disease were included in the parallel cohort. After a median follow-up of 5.4 years (IQR 3.1-6.8) the event-free-survival benefit from the addition of trastuzumab to chemotherapy was maintained in patients with HER2-positive disease. 5 year event-free survival was 58% (95% CI 48-66) in patients in the trastuzumab group and 43% (34-52) in those in the chemotherapy group; the unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) for event-free survival between the two randomised HER2-positive treatment groups was 0.64 (95% CI 0.44-0.93; two-sided log-rank p=0.016). Event-free survival was strongly associated with pathological complete remission in patients given trastuzumab. Of the 68 patients with a pathological complete response (45 with trastuzumab and 23 with chemotherapy alone), the HR for event-free survival between those with and without trastuzumab was 0.29 (95% CI 0.11-0.78). During follow-up only four cardiovascular adverse events were regarded by the investigator to be drug-related (grade 2 lymphostasis and grade 2 lymphoedema, each in one patient in the trastuzumab group, and grade 2 thrombosis and grade 2 deep vein thrombosis, each in one patient in the chemotherapy-alone group). INTERPRETATION: These results show a sustained benefit in event-free survival from trastuzumab-containing neoadjuvant therapy followed by adjuvant trastuzumab in patients with locally advanced or inflammatory breast cancer, and provide new insight into the association between pathological complete remission and long-term outcomes in HER2-positive disease.

Final overall survival: fulvestrant 500 mg vs 250 mg in the randomized CONFIRM trial.

BACKGROUND: At the time of the initial analysis of overall survival (OS) for the Comparison of Faslodex in Recurrent or Metastatic Breast Cancer (CONFIRM) randomized, double-blind, phase III trial, approximately 50% of patients had died. A final analysis of OS was subsequently planned for when 75% of patients had died. METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to fulvestrant 500 mg administered as two 5-mL intramuscular injections on days 0, 14, and 28 and every 28 (±3) days thereafter or fulvestrant 250 mg administered as two 5-mL intramuscular injections (one fulvestrant and one placebo [identical in appearance to study drug]) on days 0, 14 (two placebo injections only), and 28 and every 28 (±3) days thereafter. OS was analyzed using an unadjusted log-rank test. No adjustments were made for multiplicity. Serious adverse events (SAEs) and best response to subsequent therapy were also reported. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: In total, 736 women (median age = 61.0 years) were randomly assigned to fulvestrant 500 mg (n = 362) or 250 mg (n = 374). At the final survival analysis, 554 of 736 (75.3%) patients had died. Median OS was 26.4 months for fulvestrant 500 mg and 22.3 months for 250 mg (hazard ratio = 0.81; 95% confidence interval = 0.69-0.96; nominal P = .02). There were no clinically important differences in SAE profiles between the treatment groups; no clustering of SAEs could be detected in either treatment group. Type of first subsequent therapy and objective responses to first subsequent therapy were well balanced between the two treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with locally advanced or metastatic estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer, fulvestrant 500 mg is associated with a 19% reduction in risk of death and a 4.1-month difference in median OS compared with fulvestrant 250 mg. Fulvestrant 500 mg was well tolerated, and no new safety concerns were identified.

Randomized phase II, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of exemestane with or without entinostat in postmenopausal women with locally recurrent or metastatic estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer progressing on treatment with a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor.

PURPOSE: Entinostat is an oral isoform selective histone deacetylase inhibitor that targets resistance to hormonal therapies in estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) breast cancer. This randomized, placebo-controlled, phase II study evaluated entinostat combined with the aromatase inhibitor exemestane versus exemestane alone. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Postmenopausal women with ER+ advanced breast cancer progressing on a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor were randomly assigned to exemestane 25 mg daily plus entinostat 5 mg once per week (EE) or exemestane plus placebo (EP). The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Blood was collected in a subset of patients for evaluation of protein lysine acetylation as a biomarker of entinostat activity. RESULTS: One hundred thirty patients were randomly assigned (EE group, n = 64; EP group, n = 66). Based on intent-to-treat analysis, treatment with EE improved median PFS to 4.3 months versus 2.3 months with EP (hazard ratio [HR], 0.73; 95% CI, 0.50 to 1.07; one-sided P = .055; two-sided P = .11 [predefined significance level of .10, one-sided]). Median overall survival was an exploratory end point and improved to 28.1 months with EE versus 19.8 months with EP (HR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.97; P = .036). Fatigue and neutropenia were the most frequent grade 3/4 toxicities. Treatment discontinuation because of adverse events was higher in the EE group versus the EP group (11% v 2%). Protein lysine hyperacetylation in the EE biomarker subset was associated with prolonged PFS. CONCLUSION: Entinostat added to exemestane is generally well tolerated and demonstrated activity in patients with ER+ advanced breast cancer in this signal-finding phase II study. Acetylation changes may provide an opportunity to maximize clinical benefit with entinostat. Plans for a confirmatory study are underway.

Comparing duration of response and duration of clinical benefit between fulvestrant treatment groups in the CONFIRM trial: application of new methodology.

Comparisons of duration of response (DoR) and duration of clinical benefit (DoCB) within clinical trials are prone to biases. To address these biases, we used new methodology to prospectively analyze expected DoR and expected DoCB. Objective response rate and clinical benefit rate were calculated for fulvestrant 500 and 250 mg, and used to calculate expected DoR and expected DoCB for each dose group. The ratios for expected DoR and expected DoCB (expected DoR500/expected DoR250 and expected DoCB500/expected DoCB250) were then calculated, thereby allowing statistical comparisons of these endpoints between each arm of the COmparisoN of Faslodex In Recurrent or Metastatic breast cancer (CONFIRM) trial. Expected DoRs for fulvestrant 500 and 250 mg were 3.2 and 3.6 months, respectively. The expected DoR ratio between fulvestrant 500 and 250 mg was not statistically significant (0.89; 95 % CI, 0.48-1.67, P = 0.724). The expected DoCBs for fulvestrant 500 and 250 mg were 9.8 and 7.2 months, respectively. The expected DoCB ratio showed that the expected DoCB for fulvestrant 500 mg was significantly improved compared with the expected DoCB for fulvestrant 250 mg (1.36; 95 % CI, 1.07-1.73, P = 0.013). Analysis of the expected DoR and expected DoCB showed fulvestrant 500 mg significantly increased expected DoCB compared with fulvestrant 250 mg in the CONFIRM trial.

CNS relapses in patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer who have and have not received adjuvant trastuzumab: a retrospective substudy of the HERA trial (BIG 1-01).

BACKGROUND: Several randomised trials have confirmed the benefit of adjuvant trastuzumab for patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer. However, concern has been expressed that adjuvant trastuzumab might be associated with an increased frequency of CNS relapses. We assessed the frequency and course of CNS relapses, either as first event or at any time, using data from the HERA trial. METHODS: We estimated the cumulative incidence of first disease-free survival (DFS) events in the CNS versus other sites by competing risks analysis in patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer who had been randomly assigned to receive 1 year of trastuzumab or to observation in the HERA trial after a median follow-up of 4 years (IQR 3·5-4·8). To obtain further information about CNS relapse at any time before death, we circulated a data collection form to investigators to obtain standardised information about CNS events that occurred in all patients who had died before July, 2009. We estimated the cumulative incidence of CNS relapse at any time with a competing risks analysis. RESULTS: Of 3401 patients who had been assigned to receive 1 year of trastuzumab or to observation, 69 (2%) had a CNS relapse as first DFS event and 747 (22%) had a first DFS event not in the CNS. The frequency of CNS relapses as first DFS event did not differ between the group given 1 year of trastuzumab (37 [2%] of 1703 patients) and the observation group (32 [2%] of 1698; p=0·55 [Gray's test]). 481 data collection forms were distributed, of which 413 (86%) were returned. The proportion of patients who had died and experienced a CNS relapse was numerically higher in the observation group (129 [57%] of 227) than in the group given trastuzumab for 1 year (88 [47%] of 186; p=0·06 [Gray's test]). Most CNS relapses were symptomatic (189 [87%] of 217). CONCLUSION: Adjuvant trastuzumab does not increase the risk of CNS relapse in patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer. FUNDING: None.

Subcutaneous versus intravenous administration of (neo)adjuvant trastuzumab in patients with HER2-positive, clinical stage I-III breast cancer (HannaH study): a phase 3, open-label, multicentre, randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: A subcutaneous formulation of trastuzumab has been developed, offering potential improvements in patient convenience and resource use compared with the standard intravenous infusion of the drug. We compared the pharmacokinetic profile, efficacy, and safety of the subcutaneous and intravenous formulations in patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer. METHODS: The HannaH study was a phase 3, randomised, international, open-label, trial in the (neo)adjuvant setting. Patients with HER2-positive, operable, locally advanced or inflammatory breast cancer were randomly assigned to eight cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy administered concurrently with trastuzumab every 3 weeks either intravenously (8 mg/kg loading dose, 6 mg/kg maintenance dose) or subcutaneously (fixed dose of 600 mg); 1:1 ratio. Chemotherapy consisted of four cycles of docetaxel (75 mg/m(2)) followed by four cycles of fluorouracil (500 mg/m(2)), epirubicin (75 mg/m(2)), and cyclophosphamide (500 mg/m(2)), every 3 weeks. After surgery, patients continued trastuzumab to complete 1 year of treatment. Coprimary endpoints were serum trough concentration (C(trough)) at pre-dose cycle 8 before surgery (non-inferiority margin for the ratio between groups of 0·80) and pathological complete response (pCR; non-inferiority margin for the difference between groups of -12·5%), analysed in the per-protocol population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00950300. FINDINGS: 299 patients were randomly assigned to receive intravenous trastuzumab and 297 to receive subcutaneous trastuzumab. The geometric mean presurgery C(trough) was 51·8 µg/mL (coefficient of variation 52·5%) in the intravenous group and 69·0 µg/mL (55·8%) in the subcutaneous group. The geometric mean ratio of C(trough) subcutaneous to C(trough) intravenous was 1·33 (90% CI 1·24-1·44). 107 (40·7%) of 263 patients in the intravenous group and 118 (45·4%) of 260 in the subcutaneous group achieved a pCR. The difference between groups in pCR was 4·7% (95% CI -4·0 to 13·4). Thus subcutaneous trastuzumab was non-inferior to intravenous trastuzumab for both coprimary endpoints. The incidence of grade 3-5 adverse events was similar between groups. The most common of these adverse events were neutropenia (99 [33·2%] of 298 patients in the intravenous group vs 86 [29·0%] of 297 in the subcutaneous group), leucopenia (17 [5·7%] vs 12 [4·0%]), and febrile neutropenia (10 [3·4%] vs 17 [5·7%]). However, more patients had serious adverse events in the subcutaneous group (62 [21%] of 297 patients) than in the intravenous group (37 [12%] of 298); the difference was mainly attributable to infections and infestations (24 [8·1%] in the subcutaneous group vs 13 [4·4%] in the intravenous group). Four adverse events led to death (one in the intravenous group and three in the subcutaneous group), all of which occurred during the neoadjuvant phase. Of these, two--both in the subcutaneous group--were deemed to be treatment related. INTERPRETATION: Subcutaneous trastuzumab, administered over about 5 min, has a pharmacokinetic profile and efficacy non-inferior to standard intravenous administration, with a similar safety profile to intravenous trastuzumab, and therefore offers a valid treatment alternative. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Phase II study of bevacizumab in combination with trastuzumab and capecitabine as first-line treatment for HER-2-positive locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer.

We report the first results from a phase II, open-label study designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of bevacizumab in combination with trastuzumab and capecitabine as first-line therapy for human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER)-2-positive locally recurrent (LR) or metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Patients were aged ≥18 years with confirmed breast adenocarcinoma, measurable LR/MBC and documented HER-2-positive disease. Patients received bevacizumab (15 mg/kg on day 1) plus trastuzumab (8 mg/kg on day 1 of cycle 1, 6 mg/kg on day 1 of each subsequent cycle) plus capecitabine (1,000 mg/m2 twice daily, days 1-14) every 3 weeks until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or consent withdrawal. Eighty-eight patients were enrolled; 40 (46%) are still on study treatment. The median follow-up was 8.8 months (range, 0.9-17.1 months). The overall response rate, the primary endpoint, was 73% (95% confidence interval [CI], 62%-82%), comprising 7% complete and 66% partial responses. The median progression-free survival interval was 14.4 months (95% CI, 10.4 months to not reached [NR]), with 35 events. The median time to progression was 14.5 months (95% CI, 10.5 months to NR), with 33 events. Treatment was well tolerated; main side effects were grade 3 hand-foot syndrome (22%), grade ≥3 diarrhea (9%), and grade ≥3 hypertension (7%). Overall, 44% of patients experienced grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events and 13 patients discontinued capecitabine because of toxicity, but continued with bevacizumab and trastuzumab. Heart failure was seen in two patients. The combination of bevacizumab, trastuzumab, and capecitabine was clinically active as first-line therapy for patients with HER-2-positive MBC, with an acceptable safety profile and no unexpected toxicities.

First-line treatment of advanced breast cancer with sunitinib in combination with docetaxel versus docetaxel alone: results of a prospective, randomized phase III study.

PURPOSE: To investigate whether sunitinib plus docetaxel improves clinical outcomes for patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)/neu-negative advanced breast cancer (ABC) versus docetaxel alone. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this phase III study, patients were randomly assigned to open-label combination therapy (sunitinib 37.5 mg/d, days 2 to 15 every 3 weeks; and docetaxel 75 mg/m(2), day 1 every 3 weeks) or monotherapy (docetaxel 100 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks). Progression-free survival (PFS) was the primary end point. RESULTS: Two hundred ninety-six patients were randomly assigned to combination therapy, and 297 patients were assigned to monotherapy. Median PFS times were 8.6 and 8.3 months with combination therapy and monotherapy, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.92; one-sided P = .265). The objective response rate (ORR) was significantly higher with the combination (55%) than with monotherapy (42%; one-sided P = .001). Duration of response was similar in both arms (7.5 months with the combination v 7.2 months with monotherapy). Median overall survival (OS) times were 24.8 and 25.5 months with combination therapy and monotherapy, respectively (one-sided P = .904). There were 107 deaths with the combination and 91 deaths with monotherapy. The frequency of common adverse events (AEs) was higher with the combination, as were treatment discontinuations caused by AEs. CONCLUSION: The combination of sunitinib plus docetaxel improved ORR but did not prolong either PFS or OS compared with docetaxel alone when given to an unselected HER2/neu-negative cohort as first-line treatment for ABC. Sunitinib combination therapy may also have resulted in AEs that yield an unfavorable risk-benefit ratio. The sunitinib-docetaxel regimen evaluated in this study is not recommended for further use in ABC.

VEGFR1 and PKCα signaling control melanoma vasculogenic mimicry in a VEGFR2 kinase-independent manner.

We have recently shown that vascular endothelial growth factor-A (VEGFA), a major regulator of tumor vascularization, is essential for the organization of tumor cells into capillary-like structure (CLS), which is a hallmark of tumor vasculogenic mimicry (VM). Herein we further dissect the involvement of VEGFA and its downstream transducers, VEGF receptor 1 (VEGFR1), VEGFR2, and protein kinase C (PKC) in melanoma VM. The knockdown of VEGFR1 in three melanoma cell lines completely disrupts Matrigel-induced CLS formation, whereas inhibition of VEGFR2 kinase with a specific inhibitor, protein tyrosine kinase inhibitor II (PTKi-II), does not affect the process, indicating that VEGFR2 signaling is not involved in VEGFA-mediated melanoma VM. Furthermore, among tested PKC isoforms, only PKCα and δ are expressed in the melanoma cells during CLS formation. Pretreatment with selective PKCα and δ inhibitors blocked CLS formation. However, inhibition of PKCα, but not PKCδ, completely destroyed the previously formed CLS. Moreover, knockdown of PKCα, but not PKCδ, using small interfering RNAs abrogated CLS formation, suggesting that PKCα is the major contributory factor in melanoma VM. In-vivo experiments indicate that disruption of PKCα signaling significantly reduces the signs of VM in allografted B16/F10 melanoma. These findings may contribute to the development of new therapeutic agents that target melanoma VM.

Melanoma vasculogenic mimicry capillary-like structure formation depends on integrin and calcium signaling.

OBJECTIVE: We recently demonstrated that the formation of CLSs in vitro, which are thought to be a reconstitution of VM, is controlled by VEGFA. CLS formation also requires the extracellular matrix signals, presumably transduced by integrins. Both pathways are affected by Ca(2+). Therefore, we directly tested the roles of Ca(2+) and integrin in melanoma VM. METHODS: The investigation was performed by immunocytochemical, histochemical, and 3D co-culture assays. We have also used an in vivo animal model. RESULTS: The extracellular and intracellular Ca(2+) chelators, EGTA and BAPTA-AM, prevented CLS formation on Matrigel, caused actin rearrangement, and completely destroyed the preformed CLS. Addition of colcemid or cytochalasin D prevented the CLS formation and destroyed the preformed CLS network. Herein, we also show that blocking antibodies to ανß3 and ανß5 integrins disrupted the CLS network. Control blocking antibody to ß1 integrin had no effect. In vivo experiments indicated that Ca(2+) chelation dramatically reduced the signs of VM in melanoma tumors grafted in mice. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that the formation of CLS is tightly regulated by extracellular and intracellular Ca(2+) levels; ανß3 and ανß5 integrins are primarily responsible for CLS formation, whereas ß1 integrin does not participate in CLS formation.

Denosumab compared with zoledronic acid for the treatment of bone metastases in patients with advanced breast cancer: a randomized, double-blind study.

PURPOSE: This randomized study compared denosumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody against receptor activator of nuclear factor κ B (RANK) ligand, with zoledronic acid in delaying or preventing skeletal-related events (SREs) in patients with breast cancer with bone metastases. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive either subcutaneous denosumab 120 mg and intravenous placebo (n = 1,026) or intravenous zoledronic acid 4 mg adjusted for creatinine clearance and subcutaneous placebo (n = 1,020) every 4 weeks. All patients were strongly recommended to take daily calcium and vitamin D supplements. The primary end point was time to first on-study SRE (defined as pathologic fracture, radiation or surgery to bone, or spinal cord compression). RESULTS: Denosumab was superior to zoledronic acid in delaying time to first on-study SRE (hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.95; P = .01 superiority) and time to first and subsequent (multiple) on-study SREs (rate ratio, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.89; P = .001). Reduction in bone turnover markers was greater with denosumab. Overall survival, disease progression, and rates of adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs were similar between groups. An excess of renal AEs and acute-phase reactions occurred with zoledronic acid; hypocalcemia occurred more frequently with denosumab. Osteonecrosis of the jaw occurred infrequently (2.0%, denosumab; 1.4%, zoledronic acid; P = .39). CONCLUSION: Denosumab was superior to zoledronic acid in delaying or preventing SREs in patients with breast cancer metastatic to bone and was generally well tolerated. With the convenience of a subcutaneous injection and no requirement for renal monitoring, denosumab represents a potential treatment option for patients with bone metastases.

Results of the CONFIRM phase III trial comparing fulvestrant 250 mg with fulvestrant 500 mg in postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor-positive advanced breast cancer.

PURPOSE: We compared fulvestrant 500 mg regimen with the approved dose of fulvestrant 250 mg per month for treatment of postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor-positive advanced breast cancer who experienced progression after prior endocrine therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Comparison of Faslodex in Recurrent or Metastatic Breast Cancer (CONFIRM) is a double-blind, parallel-group, multicenter, phase III study. Patients were randomly assigned to fulvestrant 500 mg (500 mg intramuscularly [IM] on day 0, then 500 mg IM on days 14 and 28 and every 28 days thereafter) or 250 mg every 28 days. Primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points included objective response rate, clinical benefit rate (CBR), duration of clinical benefit (DoCB), overall survival (OS), and quality of life (QOL). RESULTS: PFS was significantly longer for fulvestrant 500 mg (n = 362) than 250 mg (n = 374) (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.80; 95% CI, 0.68 to 0.94; P = .006), corresponding to a 20% reduction in risk of progression. Objective response rate was similar for fulvestrant 500 mg and 250 mg (9.1% v 10.2%, respectively). CBR was 45.6% for fulvestrant 500 mg and 39.6% for fulvestrant 250 mg. DoCB and OS were 16.6 and 25.1 months, respectively, for the 500-mg group, whereas DoCB and OS were 13.9 and 22.8 months, respectively, in the 250-mg group. Fulvestrant 500 mg was well tolerated with no dose-dependent adverse events. QOL was similar for both arms. CONCLUSION: Fulvestrant 500 mg was associated with a statistically significant increase in PFS and not associated with increased toxicity, corresponding to a clinically meaningful improvement in benefit versus risk compared with fulvestrant 250 mg.

First-line trastuzumab plus epirubicin and cyclophosphamide therapy in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive metastatic breast cancer: cardiac safety and efficacy data from the Herceptin, Cyclophosphamide, and Epirubicin (HERCULES) trial.

PURPOSE: A high incidence of congestive heart failure (CHF) has been observed in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) receiving doxorubicin-based chemotherapy and trastuzumab. The Herceptin, Cyclophosphamide, and Epirubicin (HERCULES) trial evaluated trastuzumab plus cyclophosphamide and the less cardiotoxic anthracycline epirubicin. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This prospective trial combined a phase I dose-finding stage with a phase II randomized stage. In total, 120 patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) -positive MBC and adequate cardiac function received first-line trastuzumab (4 mg/kg intravenous loading dose, then 2 mg/kg every week) plus cyclophosphamide (600 mg/m(2)) and either epirubicin 60 mg/m(2) (HEC-60) or 90 mg/m(2) (HEC-90) for six cycles, followed by trastuzumab monotherapy until progression. Sixty patients with HER2-negative disease received epirubicin (90 mg/m(2)) and cyclophosphamide (EC-90) alone. The primary end point was dose-limiting cardiotoxicity (DLC). RESULTS: Incidence of DLC was 5.0%, 1.7%, and 0% in the HEC-90, HEC-60, and EC-90 arms, respectively. All DLC events were manageable. There were no cardiac-related deaths. Other adverse-event profiles were comparable across the three arms, except febrile neutropenia, which was reported in 10% of the HEC-90 arm compared with 3% of the other arms. Tumor response rates were 57%, 60%, and 25% in the HEC-60, HEC-90, and EC-90 arms, respectively; median time to progression was 12.5, 10.1, and 7.6 months, respectively. CONCLUSION: The HEC regimen is a promising treatment option for patients with HER2-positive MBC. The lower incidence of DLC with HEC, compared with the historic incidence associated with trastuzumab plus doxorubicin, supports further evaluation of the regimen, especially in adjuvant or neoadjuvant settings.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with trastuzumab followed by adjuvant trastuzumab versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone, in patients with HER2-positive locally advanced breast cancer (the NOAH trial): a randomised controlled superiority trial with a parallel HER2-negative cohort.

BACKGROUND: The monoclonal antibody trastuzumab has survival benefit when given with chemotherapy to patients with early, operable, and metastatic breast cancer that has HER2 (also known as ERBB2) overexpression or amplification. We aimed to assess event-free survival in patients with HER2-positive locally advanced or inflammatory breast cancer receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy with or without 1 year of trastuzumab. METHODS: We compared 1 year of treatment with trastuzumab (given as neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatment; n=117) with no trastuzumab (118), in women with HER2-positive locally advanced or inflammatory breast cancer treated with a neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimen consisting of doxorubicin, paclitaxel, cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil. Randomisation was done with a computer program and minimisation technique, taking account of geographical area, disease stage, and hormone receptor status. Investigators were informed of treatment allocation. A parallel cohort of 99 patients with HER2-negative disease was included and treated with the same chemotherapy regimen. Primary endpoint was event-free survival. Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered, number ISRCTN86043495. FINDINGS: Trastuzumab significantly improved event-free survival in patients with HER2-positive breast cancer (3-year event-free survival, 71% [95% CI 61-78; n=36 events] with trastuzumab, vs 56% [46-65; n=51 events] without; hazard ratio 0.59 [95% CI 0.38-0.90]; p=0.013). Trastuzumab was well tolerated and, despite concurrent administration with doxorubicin, only two patients (2%) developed symptomatic cardiac failure. Both responded to cardiac drugs. INTERPRETATION: The addition of neoadjuvant and adjuvant trastuzumab to neoadjuvant chemotherapy should be considered for women with HER2-positive locally advanced or inflammatory breast cancer to improve event-free survival, survival, and clinical and pathological tumour responses. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Multicenter phase III comparison of cisplatin/S-1 with cisplatin/infusional fluorouracil in advanced gastric or gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma study: the FLAGS trial.

PURPOSE: Patients with advanced gastric or gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma need more efficacious and safer treatments than established today. S-1, a contemporary oral fluoropyrimidine, can provide that advantage. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study was conducted in 24 countries and 146 centers. One thousand fifty-three patients were stratified (center, number of metastatic sites, prior adjuvant therapy, and measurable cancer) and randomly assigned. Patients received either S-1 at 50 mg/m(2) divided in two daily doses for 21 days and cisplatin at 75 mg/m(2) intravenously on day 1, repeated every 28 days (527 patients) or infusional fluorouracil at 1,000 mg/m(2)/24 hours for 120 hours and cisplatin at 100 mg/m(2) intravenously on day 1, repeated every 28 days (526 patients). The primary end point was superiority in overall survival (OS) from cisplatin/S-1 compared with cisplatin/infusional fluorouracil in patients with advanced, untreated gastric, or gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma. The secondary end points were response rate, progression-free survival, time to treatment failure, and safety. RESULTS: The median OS was 8.6 months in the cisplatin/S-1 arm and 7.9 months in the cisplatin/infusional fluorouracil arm (HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.80 to 1.05; P = .20). Significant safety advantages were observed in the cisplatin/S-1 arm compared with the cisplatin/infusional fluorouracil arm for the rates of grade 3/4 neutropenia (32.3% v 63.6%), complicated neutropenia (5.0% v 14.4%), stomatitis (1.3% v 13.6%), hypokalemia (3.6% v 10.8%), and treatment-related deaths (2.5% v 4.9%; P < .05). CONCLUSION: Cisplatin/S-1 did not prolong OS of patients with advanced gastric or gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma compared with cisplatin/infusional fluorouracil, but it did result in a significantly improved safety profile.