Neoadjuvant PF-05280014 (a potential trastuzumab biosimilar) versus trastuzumab for operable HER2+ breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: This randomised, double-blind study compared pharmacokinetics, efficacy, safety and immunogenicity of PF-05280014 (potential trastuzumab biosimilar) and trastuzumab reference product (Herceptin) sourced from the European Union (trastuzumab-EU) as neoadjuvant treatment for operable human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer. METHODS: Patients (N = 226), stratified by primary tumour size and hormone receptor status, were randomised 1:1 to PF-05280014 or trastuzumab-EU (8 mg/kg loading dose; 6 mg/kg thereafter), each with docetaxel and carboplatin, every 3 weeks for six treatment cycles. Primary endpoint was percentage of patients with trough plasma concentration (Ctrough) >20 µg/ml at Cycle 5 (Cycle 6 predose). Efficacy endpoints included pathological complete response and objective response rate. Non-inferiority of PF-05280014 to trastuzumab-EU was declared if the lower limit of the 95% confidence interval for the stratified difference between groups in the percentage of patients with Cycle 5 Ctrough >20 µg/ml was above the prespecified non-inferiority margin of - 12.5%. RESULTS: For PF-05280014 vs trastuzumab-EU patients, respectively, 92.1% vs 93.3% had Cycle 5 Ctrough >20 µg/ml; the lower limit of the 95% confidence interval (- 8.02%, 6.49%) for the stratified difference between groups was above the non-inferiority margin (- 12.5%). Pathological complete response (47.0% vs 50.0%) and central radiology review-assessed objective response (88.1% vs 82.0%) rates were comparable. Incidence of all-causality, grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events was 38.1% vs 45.5%; antidrug antibody rates were 0% vs 0.89%. CONCLUSIONS: PF-05280014 demonstrated non-inferior pharmacokinetics and comparable efficacy, safety and immunogenicity to trastuzumab-EU in patients with operable HER2-positive breast cancer receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

The relationship between weight gain during chemotherapy and outcomes in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: This post hoc, pooled analysis examined the relationship between different weight gain categories and overall survival (OS) in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) receiving first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. METHODS: Data were pooled from the control arms of three phase III clinical studies (NCT00596830, NCT00254891, and NCT00254904), and the maximum weight gain in the first 3 months from treatment initiation was categorised as >0%, >2.5%, and >5.0%. Cox proportional hazard modelling of OS was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for each category, including baseline covariates, time to weight gain, and time to confirmed objective response (RECIST Version 1.0). RESULTS: Of 1030 patients with advanced NSCLC (IIIB 11.5% and IV 88.5%), 453 (44.0%), 252 (24.5%), and 120 (11.7%) experienced weight gain from baseline of >0%, >2.5%, and >5.0%, respectively. The median time to weight gain was 23 (>0%), 43 (>2.5%), and 45 (>5.0%) days. After adjusting for a time-dependent confirmed objective response, the risk of death was reduced for patients with any weight gain (>0% vs. ≤0% [HR 0.71; 95% confidence interval-CI 0.61, 0.82], >2.5% vs. ≤2.5% [HR 0.76; 95% CI 0.64, 0.91] and >5.0% vs. ≤5.0% [HR 0.77; 95% CI 0.60, 0.99]). The median OS was 13.5 versus 8.6 months (weight gain >0% vs. ≤0%), 14.4 versus 9.4 months (weight gain >2.5% vs. ≤2.5%), and 13.4 versus 10.2 months (weight gain >5.0% vs. ≤5.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Weight gain during treatment was associated with a reduced risk of death, independent of tumour response. The survival benefit was comparable for weight gain >0%, >2.5%, and >5.0%, suggesting that any weight gain may be an early predictor of survival with implications for the design of interventional cancer cachexia studies.

Long-Term Safety and Effectiveness of PF-05280014 (a Trastuzumab Biosimilar) Treatment in Patients with HER2-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer: Updated Results of a Randomized, Double-Blind Study.

BACKGROUND: PF-05280014 was compared with trastuzumab sourced from the European Union (trastuzumab-EU), each plus paclitaxel, as first-line treatment for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive metastatic breast cancer in a phase III study. Equivalence between treatment groups was demonstrated. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to report long-term safety and overall survival (OS) over 6 years after the first patient was screened. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Randomized patients received intravenous PF-05280014 or trastuzumab-EU, each plus paclitaxel, until objective disease progression. OS, long-term safety, subgroup safety (patients ongoing after day 378), and time-to-treatment discontinuation (TTD) were assessed based on the final statistical analysis plan amended for the ad-hoc analyses. RESULTS: Of 707 randomized patients (n = 352, PF-05280014; n = 355, trastuzumab-EU), 252 (71.6%) in the PF-05280014 and 251 (70.7%) in the trastuzumab-EU group discontinued treatment due to objective progression. Overall, 451 (63.8%) patients completed the study. Between groups (PF-05280014; trastuzumab-EU), estimated median TTDs were 12.25 and 12.06 months (p = 0.692); 61 (17.3%) and 67 (18.9%) patients died; stratified hazard ratio for OS was 0.929 (95% confidence interval 0.656-1.316; p = 0.339); estimated survival rates were 82.3 and 77.4% at 2 years and 77.2 and 75.3% at 3 years. The incidences of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) overall (98.6%; 96.6%) and for grades ≥3 (41.0%; 43.1%) were comparable between groups. In patients (n = 265; n = 264) ongoing after day 378, the incidences of any TEAEs, grade ≥3 TEAEs, and serious TEAEs were comparable between the treatment groups. CONCLUSION: Long-term safety and OS were consistent with previous results and demonstrated no clinically meaningful differences between treatment groups. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01989676 (21 November 2013); and EudraCT: 2013-001352-34 (18 December 2013).

PF-06439535 (a Bevacizumab Biosimilar) Compared with Reference Bevacizumab (Avastin®), Both Plus Paclitaxel and Carboplatin, as First-Line Treatment for Advanced Non-Squamous Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Randomized, Double-Blind Study.

BACKGROUND: PF-06439535 is a bevacizumab biosimilar. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of PF-06439535 with that of reference bevacizumab (Avastin®) sourced from the EU (bevacizumab-EU), each with paclitaxel and carboplatin, in the first-line treatment of advanced non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: In this double-blind, parallel-group study, we recruited patients from 159 centers in 27 countries. Participants were randomized 1:1 to receive PF-06439535 plus paclitaxel and carboplatin or bevacizumab-EU plus paclitaxel and carboplatin on day 1 of each 21-day cycle for 4-6 cycles, followed by blinded monotherapy with PF-06439535 or bevacizumab-EU until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal of consent, or the end of the study. Randomization was stratified by region, sex, and smoking history. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) in accordance with RECIST 1.1, based on responses achieved by week 19 and confirmed by week 25. RESULTS: Between 21 May 2015 and 14 November 2016, 719 patients were randomized to the PF-06439535 group (n = 358) or the bevacizumab-EU group (n = 361). As of data cutoff for analysis of the primary endpoint (8 May 2017), 45.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] 40.01-50.57) of patients in the PF-06439535 group and 44.6% (95% CI 39.40-49.89) of patients in the bevacizumab-EU group achieved an objective response by week 19 that was confirmed by week 25. The unstratified ORR risk ratio was 1.015 (95% CI 0.863-1.193; 90% CI 0.886-1.163), and the unstratified ORR risk difference was 0.653% (95% CI - 6.608 to 7.908); all three CIs fell within pre-specified equivalence margins. Using final data after study completion (22 December 2017), no notable differences in progression-free survival or overall survival were observed between the groups. The most frequently reported grade 3 or higher treatment-emergent adverse events were hypertension, neutropenia, and anemia. There were no clinically meaningful differences in safety, pharmacokinetics, or immunogenicity across treatment groups. CONCLUSION: Among patients with advanced non-squamous NSCLC, PF-06439535 demonstrated similarity to bevacizumab-EU in terms of efficacy. Safety profiles for the two treatments were comparable. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02364999. FUNDING: Pfizer.

An Adjustable Dalteparin Sodium Dose Regimen for the Prevention of Clotting in the Extracorporeal Circuit in Hemodialysis: A Clinical Trial of Safety and Efficacy (the PARROT Study).

BACKGROUND: Dalteparin sodium, a low-molecular-weight heparin, is indicated for prevention of clotting in the extracorporeal circuit during hemodialysis (HD). Product labeling recommends a fixed single-bolus dose of 5000 international units (IU) for HD sessions lasting up to 4 hours, but adjustable dosing may be beneficial in clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the PARROT study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of an adjustable dose of dalteparin in patients with end-stage renal disease requiring 3 to 4 HD sessions per week. DESIGN: A 7-week, open-label, multicenter study with a single treatment arm, conducted between October 2013 and March 2016. SETTING: Ten sites in Canada. PATIENTS: A total of 152 patients with end-stage renal disease requiring 3 to 4 HD sessions per week. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was the proportion of HD sessions completed without premature termination due to inadequate anticoagulation. METHODS: All participants initially received a dose of 5000 IU dalteparin, which could be adjusted at subsequent HD sessions when clinically indicated, by increment or decrement of 500 or 1000 IU, with no specified dose limits. RESULTS: Patients were followed for 256 patient-months. Nearly all (99.9%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 99.7-100) evaluable HD sessions were completed without premature clotting. Dose was adjusted for more than half (52.3%) of participants, mostly owing to clotting or access compression time >10 minutes. Median dalteparin dose was 5000 IU (range: 500-13 000 IU). There were no major bleeds, and minor bleeding was reported in 2.3% of all HD sessions. There was no evidence of bioaccumulation. LIMITATIONS: This short-term study, with a single treatment arm, was designed to optimize dalteparin dose using a flexible dosing schedule; it was not designed to specifically evaluate dalteparin dose minimization, provide a direct comparison of dalteparin versus unfractionated heparin, or provide information on long-term safety for flexible dalteparin dosing. Patients were excluded if they were at high risk of bleeding, including those on anticoagulants and those on antiplatelet agents other than aspirin <100 mg/d. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, an adjustable dalteparin sodium dose regimen allowed safe completion of HD, with clinical benefits over fixed dosing. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01879618, registered June 13, 2013.

CONTEXTE: La daltéparine sodique, une héparine de faible poids moléculaire, est indiquée pour prévenir la formation de caillots dans le circuit extracorporel durant l'hémodialyse (HD). Pour une séance de dialyse d'une durée maximale de quatre heures, l'étiquette du produit recommande une dose fixe de 5 000 unités internationales (U.I.) administrée en bolus. Cependant, il est possible qu'il puisse être bénéfique d'ajuster la dose en pratique. OBJECTIF: Le but de l'étude PARROT était d'analyser l'innocuité et l'efficacité d'une dose ajustable de daltéparine chez des patients atteints d'insuffisance rénale terminale (IRT) et nécessitant trois à quatre séances d'HD par semaine. TYPE D'ÉTUDE: Il s'agit d'une étude ouverte et multicentrique à traitement unique d'une durée de sept semaines couvrant la période entre octobre 2013 et mars 2016. CADRE: L'étude a eu lieu dans dix centres de dialyse au Canada. SUJETS: L'étude a inclus 152 patients atteints d'IRT et nécessitant trois à quatre séances d'HD par semaine. MESURES: Le résultat principal était la proportion de séances d'HD complétées, non interrompues de manière prématurée en raison d'une anticoagulation inadéquate. MÉTHODOLOGIE: Tous les participants ont initialement reçu 5000 U.I. de daltéparine, dose qui a pu être ajustée lors des séances subséquentes, lorsqu'indiqué par le contexte clinique, à raison d'augmentation ou de réduction de 500 ou 1 000 U.I., sans spécification quant aux doses limites. RÉSULTATS: Les patients ont été suivis sur une période de 256 mois-patients. Pratiquement toutes les séances d'HD évaluables (99,9 %; IC 95 % : 99,7-100) ont été complétées sans coagulation prématurée. La dose de daltéparine a été ajustée pour plus de la moitié (52,3 %) des participants, essentiellement en raison de coagulation ou d'un besoin de procéder à une compression de l'accès vasculaire au-delà de 10 minutes. La dose médiane de daltéparine était de 5 000 U.I. (entre 500 et 13 000 U.I.). Aucune hémorragie majeure n'a été rapportée, mais une hémorragie mineure est survenue dans 2,3 % de toutes les séances d'HD analysées. Aucune bioaccumulation n'a été détectée. LIMITES: Cette étude de courte durée à traitement unique a été conçue pour optimiser le dosage de daltéparine à l'aide d'un schéma de posologie flexible. Elle ne visait pas à évaluer spécifiquement la minimisation de la dose ou à fournir des informations sur l'innocuité à long terme d'une posologie flexible pour la daltéparine. Également, les patients à haut risque d'hémorragie ont été exclus de l'étude, notamment ceux qui prenaient des anticoagulants ou des antiplaquettaires autres qu'une dose quotidienne de moins de 100 mg d'aspirine. CONCLUSION: Dans l'ensemble, un schéma posologique flexible pour la daltéparine sodique a permis de compléter les séances d'HD de façon sécuritaire, en plus de fournir des avantages cliniques par rapport à une dose fixe.

The role of training in effective simulated self-injection of subcutaneous depot medroxyprogesterone acetate: observations from a usability study.

OBJECTIVES: The need for quarterly clinic visits is a barrier to use of subcutaneous depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA-SC) contraception. The ability to self-inject at home may enhance method acceptance. Since efficacy depends on proper administration, we evaluated whether women could correctly perform simulated injections of DMPA-SC in a Uniject™ injection system using printed Instructions for Use (IFU), with and without hands-on training. STUDY DESIGN: Adult female volunteers (N=120) injected DMPA-SC into a rubber trainer at two visits, 3 months apart. Women were randomly assigned to receive hands-on training before the first injection or no training. The primary outcome was the proportion of women who successfully operated the injection system. An attempt was defined as successful if the participant correctly performed all critical steps in the injection procedure (getting ready, selecting an injection area, preparing the injector, mixing the medicine, activating the injector, injecting the dose) and expelled the dose without unexpected interruption. The success rate at month 3 was considered the primary endpoint. A one-sided 95% confidence limit >80% was used to declare the delivery system and IFU "fit for purpose." RESULTS: With training, the success rate (one-sided 95% confidence limit) was 90.0% (81.8%) at day 1 and 96.7% (90.4%) at month 3; without training, rates were 76.7% (66.7%) and 88.3% (79.8%), respectively. The trained (96.4%) and untrained (92.2%) groups successfully completed injecting into the trainer at first injection, the final critical step of the injection procedure, despite the fact that about one third of participants considered expelling depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (one component of this step) to be difficult. CONCLUSION: Most participants understood the IFU and successfully operated the injection system. Initial hands-on training improved success rates at both visits. For women interested in self-injection, providers should review all steps of the IFU, provide a demonstration, supervise initial injection(s) and ensure that the patient is aware of future injection dates. The potential for self-injection to improve adherence should be studied. IMPLICATIONS: After initial training, women performed simulated self-injections of DMPA-SC in the Uniject system proficiently using printed instructions. Women who are motivated and demonstrate competent injection technique during training can be relied upon to self-inject correctly at home. DMPA-SC users not suitable for self-injection should continue receiving injections at the clinic.