Extended RAS Analysis of the Phase III EPIC Trial: Irinotecan + Cetuximab Versus Irinotecan as Second-Line Treatment for Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The multicenter, open-label, randomized, phase III EPIC study (EMR 062202-025) investigated cetuximab plus irinotecan versus irinotecan in patients with epidermal growth factor receptor-detectable metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) that progressed on first-line fluoropyrimidine- and oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy; we report the outcomes of patients with RAS-wild-type (wt) disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Available DNA samples from RAS-unselected patients (n = 1,164 of 1,298 [89.7%]) were reanalyzed for RAS mutations using beads, emulsion, amplification, and magnetics. Baseline characteristics, efficacy, safety, and poststudy therapy were assessed. RAS-wt status was defined as a mutated RAS allele frequency of ≤5%, with all relevant alleles being analyzable. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were comparable between the groups (n = 452 patients with RAS-wt mCRC; cetuximab plus irinotecan n = 231, irinotecan n = 221) and between the RAS-wt and RAS-unselected populations. In the cetuximab plus irinotecan versus irinotecan arms, median overall survival was 12.3 versus 12.0 months, median progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.4 versus 2.6 months, and objective response rate (ORR) was 29.4% versus 5.0%, respectively. Quality of life (QoL) was improved in the cetuximab plus irinotecan arm. Serious adverse events occurred in 45.4% (cetuximab plus irinotecan) and 42.4% (irinotecan) of patients. In total, 47.1% of patients in the irinotecan arm received subsequent cetuximab therapy. CONCLUSION: PFS, ORR, and QoL were improved with cetuximab plus irinotecan as a second-line treatment in patients with RAS-wt mCRC, confirming that cetuximab-based therapy is suitable in this population. Almost half of patients in the irinotecan arm received poststudy cetuximab, masking a potential overall survival benefit of cetuximab addition. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Cetuximab is approved for the treatment of RAS-wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). In this retrospective analysis of the phase III EPIC study (cetuximab plus irinotecan vs. irinotecan alone as second-line treatment in patients with RAS-unselected mCRC), the subgroup of patients with RAS-wild-type mCRC who received cetuximab plus irinotecan had improved progression-free survival, objective response rate, and quality of life compared with the RAS-unselected population. These findings suggest that cetuximab-based therapy is a suitable second-line treatment for patients with RAS-wild-type mCRC.

Phase I study of olaratumab in Japanese patients with advanced solid tumors.

Olaratumab (IMC-3G3) is a fully human IgG1 monoclonal antibody that selectively binds the external domain of human platelet-derived growth factor receptor-α with high affinity and blocks ligand binding. This was a single-center, dose-escalation, phase I trial of olaratumab in Japanese patients with advanced/refractory solid malignancies. Three to six patients were enrolled into each of three cohorts: Patients received i.v. olaratumab: 10 mg/kg on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks (cohort 1); 20 mg/kg every 2 weeks (cohort 2); and 15 mg/kg on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks (cohort 3). Doses were escalated from cohort 1 through cohort 3. The primary objective was to establish the safety and pharmacokinetic profile of olaratumab. Sixteen patients were treated across three cohorts. There were no dose-limiting toxicities, so the maximum tolerated dose was not reached. The most common olaratumab-related treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were proteinuria (25.0%) and elevated aspartate transaminase (12.5%). One patient (cohort 2) had two olaratumab-related Grade 3 TEAEs (increased aspartate aminotransferase and tumor hemorrhage); otherwise, olaratumab-related TEAEs were Grade 1/2. Seven patients (43.8%) had a best response of stable disease. Based on the pharmacokinetic concentration profile of olaratumab, the trough concentrations following single and multiple doses at 15 mg/kg on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks (cohort 3) and multiple doses at 20 mg/kg every 2 weeks (cohort 2) were above the 155 µg/mL target. Thus, these two doses could represent an acceptable schedule for future trials in Japanese patients. Olaratumab had an acceptable safety profile and was well tolerated.

Cetuximab and chemotherapy as initial treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: We investigated the efficacy of cetuximab plus irinotecan, fluorouracil, and leucovorin (FOLFIRI) as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer and sought associations between the mutation status of the KRAS gene in tumors and clinical response to cetuximab. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with epidermal growth factor receptor-positive colorectal cancer with unresectable metastases to receive FOLFIRI either alone or in combination with cetuximab. The primary end point was progression-free survival. RESULTS: A total of 599 patients received cetuximab plus FOLFIRI, and 599 received FOLFIRI alone. The hazard ratio for progression-free survival in the cetuximab-FOLFIRI group as compared with the FOLFIRI group was 0.85 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.72 to 0.99; P=0.048). There was no significant difference in the overall survival between the two treatment groups (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.81 to 1.07; P=0.31). There was a significant interaction between treatment group and KRAS mutation status for tumor response (P=0.03) but not for progression-free survival (P=0.07) or overall survival (P=0.44). The hazard ratio for progression-free survival among patients with wild-type-KRAS tumors was 0.68 (95% CI, 0.50 to 0.94), in favor of the cetuximab-FOLFIRI group. The following grade 3 or 4 adverse events were more frequent with cetuximab plus FOLFIRI than with FOLFIRI alone: skin reactions (which were grade 3 only) (in 19.7% vs. 0.2% of patients, P<0.001), infusion-related reactions (in 2.5% vs. 0%, P<0.001), and diarrhea (in 15.7% vs. 10.5%, P=0.008). CONCLUSIONS: First-line treatment with cetuximab plus FOLFIRI, as compared with FOLFIRI alone, reduced the risk of progression of metastatic colorectal cancer. The benefit of cetuximab was limited to patients with KRAS wild-type tumors. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00154102.)

Cetuximab in combination with irinotecan/5-fluorouracil/folinic acid (FOLFIRI) in the initial treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: a multicentre two-part phase I/II study.

BACKGROUND: This study was designed to investigate the efficacy and safety of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitor cetuximab combined with irinotecan, folinic acid (FA) and two different doses of infusional 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) in the first-line treatment of EGFR-detectable metastatic colorectal cancer. METHODS: The 5-FU dose was selected on the basis of dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) during part I of the study. Patients received cetuximab (400 mg/m2 initial dose and 250 mg/m2/week thereafter) and every 2 weeks irinotecan (180 mg/m2), FA (400 mg/m2) and 5-FU (either low dose [LD], 300 mg/m2 bolus plus 2,000 mg/m2 46-hour infusion, n = 7; or, high-dose [HD], 400 mg/m2 bolus plus 2,400 mg/m2; n = 45). RESULTS: Only two DLTs occurred in the HD group, and HD 5-FU was selected for use in part II. Apart from rash, commonly observed grade 3/4 adverse events such as leucopenia, diarrhoea, vomiting and asthenia occurred within the expected range for FOLFIRI. Among 52 patients, the overall response rate was 48%. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 8.6 months (counting all reported progressions) and the median overall survival was 22.4 months. Treatment facilitated the resection of initially unresectable metastases in fourteen patients (27%): of these, 10 patients (71%) had no residual tumour after surgery, and these resections hindered the estimation of PFS. CONCLUSION: The combination of cetuximab and FOLFIRI was active and well tolerated in this setting. Initially unresectable metastases became resectable in one-quarter of patients, with a high number of complete resections, and these promising results formed the basis for the investigation of FOLFIRI with and without cetuximab in the phase III CRYSTAL trial.

Randomised phase II study of second-line olaratumab with mitoxantrone/prednisone versus mitoxantrone/prednisone alone in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Platelet-derived growth factor receptor-α (PDGFRα) is expressed in primary prostate adenocarcinoma and in associated skeletal metastases. Olaratumab is a fully human monoclonal antibody that binds PDGFRα and blocks downstream signalling. This phase II study assessed the efficacy and safety of olaratumab in combination with mitoxantrone and prednisone (M/P) versus M/P alone in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) who progressed after docetaxel. METHODS: Patients were randomised to receive 21-d cycles of olaratumab (15 mg/kg, Days 1 and 8) plus mitoxantrone (12 mg/m2, Day 1) and prednisone (5 mg, twice daily) or M/P alone. Progression-free survival (PFS) was the primary end-point. Secondary end-points included overall survival (OS), safety, and circulating tumour cell (CTC) counts. RESULTS: A total of 123 patients were randomised, 63 to olaratumab + M/P and 60 to M/P. Median PFS was 2.3 months for olaratumab + M/P and 2.4 months for M/P (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.29; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.87-1.90). Median OS was 14.2 months for olaratumab + M/P and 12.8 months for M/P (HR = 1.08; 95% CI = 0.72-1.61). Both treatment arms had similar toxicity profiles; neutropenia (24% versus 15%), anaemia (13% versus 14%) and fatigue (11% versus 9%) (olaratumab + M/P versus M/P, respectively) were the most common grade ≥3 events. High CTC count was associated with poorer OS in both arms. Patients with very high cell counts (>37 cells/7.5 ml) exhibited improved OS with olaratumab + M/P (interaction P = 0.043). CONCLUSIONS: Olaratumab + M/P had an acceptable safety profile but did not improve the efficacy of M/P chemotherapy. Further study with selected patient populations and earlier in the disease course might be considered.

A randomized multi-center phase II trial of the angiogenesis inhibitor Cilengitide (EMD 121974) and gemcitabine compared with gemcitabine alone in advanced unresectable pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: Anti-angiogenic treatment is believed to have at least cystostatic effects in highly vascularized tumours like pancreatic cancer. In this study, the treatment effects of the angiogenesis inhibitor Cilengitide and gemcitabine were compared with gemcitabine alone in patients with advanced unresectable pancreatic cancer. METHODS: A multi-national, open-label, controlled, randomized, parallel-group, phase II pilot study was conducted in 20 centers in 7 countries. Cilengitide was administered at 600 mg/m2 twice weekly for 4 weeks per cycle and gemcitabine at 1000 mg/m2 for 3 weeks followed by a week of rest per cycle. The planned treatment period was 6 four-week cycles. The primary endpoint of the study was overall survival and the secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), response rate, quality of life (QoL), effects on biological markers of disease (CA 19.9) and angiogenesis (vascular endothelial growth factor and basic fibroblast growth factor), and safety. An ancillary study investigated the pharmacokinetics of both drugs in a subset of patients. RESULTS: Eighty-nine patients were randomized. The median overall survival was 6.7 months for Cilengitide and gemcitabine and 7.7 months for gemcitabine alone. The median PFS times were 3.6 months and 3.8 months, respectively. The overall response rates were 17% and 14%, and the tumor growth control rates were 54% and 56%, respectively. Changes in the levels of CA 19.9 went in line with the clinical course of the disease, but no apparent relationships were seen with the biological markers of angiogenesis. QoL and safety evaluations were comparable between treatment groups. Pharmacokinetic studies showed no influence of gemcitabine on the pharmacokinetic parameters of Cilengitide and vice versa. CONCLUSION: There were no clinically important differences observed regarding efficacy, safety and QoL between the groups. The observations lay in the range of other clinical studies in this setting. The combination regimen was well tolerated with no adverse effects on the safety, tolerability and pharmacokinetics of either agent.

A phase I study of olaratumab, an anti-platelet-derived growth factor receptor alpha (PDGFRα) monoclonal antibody, in patients with advanced solid tumors.

PURPOSE: The platelet-derived growth factor receptor (PDGFR) has an important role in tumorigenesis and tumor progression. Olaratumab (IMC-3G3) is a fully human monoclonal antibody that selectively binds human PDGFRα and blocks ligand binding. This phase I study assessed the safety, maximum tolerated dose (MTD), recommended phase II dose (RP2D), pharmacokinetics, and preliminary antitumor activity of olaratumab in patients with advanced solid tumors. METHODS: Patients were enrolled into five dose-escalating cohorts of 3-6 patients each. Olaratumab was administered intravenously weekly at 4, 8, or 16 mg/kg (cohorts 1-3) or once every other week at 15 or 20 mg/kg (cohorts 4-5), with 4 weeks/cycle. RESULTS: Nineteen patients were treated in five cohorts. There were no dose-limiting toxicities; the MTD was not identified with the doses studied. The most common olaratumab-related adverse events (AE) were fatigue and infusion reactions (10.5 % each). With the exception of 1 patient (20 mg/kg) experiencing two grade 3 drug-related AEs after the dose-limiting toxicity assessment period, all drug-related AEs were grade 1 or 2. The trough concentrations (C min) for 16 mg/kg weekly and 20 mg/kg biweekly were higher than 155 µg/mL, and the concentration found to be efficacious in preclinical xenograft models. Twelve patients (63.2 %) had a best response of stable disease [median duration of 3.9 months (95 % CI 2.3-8.7)]. CONCLUSIONS: Olaratumab was well tolerated and showed preliminary antitumor activity. RP2Ds are 16 mg/kg weekly and 20 mg/kg biweekly. Phase II studies of olaratumab as monotherapy and in combination are ongoing in several tumor types.

Cilengitide induces cellular detachment and apoptosis in endothelial and glioma cells mediated by inhibition of FAK/src/AKT pathway.

BACKGROUND: The antiangiogenic agent cilengitide disrupts integrin binding to the extracellular matrix leading to apoptosis of activated endothelial cells. Integrins are also widely expressed in malignant glioma and integrin inhibitors may directly target tumor cells in this disease. Aim of the current study was to investigate effects of cilengitide on endothelial and glioma cells on molecular and cellular levels. RESULTS: Cilengitide caused dose-dependent detachment of endothelial cells from cell culture dishes. Proliferation of endothelial cells was significantly inhibited while the proportion of apoptotic cells was increased. Incubation of integrin-expressing glioma cells with cilengitide caused rounding and detachment after 24 hours as observed with endothelial cells. Cilengitide inhibited proliferation and induced apoptosis in glioma cells with methylated MGMT promotor when given alone or in combination with temozolomide. In endothelial as well as glioma cells cilengitide inhibited phosphorylation of FAK, Src and Akt. Assembly of cytoskeleton and tight junctions was heavily disturbed in both cell types. CONCLUSION: Cilengitide inhibits integrin-dependent signaling, causes disassembly of cytoskeleton, cellular detachment and induction of apoptosis in endothelial and glioma cells thereby explaining the profound activity of integrin inhibitors in gliomas. The combination of cilengitide with temozolomide exerted additive effects in glioma cells as observed clinically.

Randomized phase II study of cilengitide, an integrin-targeting arginine-glycine-aspartic acid peptide, in recurrent glioblastoma multiforme.

PURPOSE: Cilengitide, an inhibitor of alphavbeta3 and alphavbeta5 integrin receptors, demonstrated minimal toxicity and durable activity across a wide range of doses administered to adults with recurrent glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) in a prior phase I study. The current multicenter phase II study was conducted to evaluate the activity and safety of cilengitide in GBM patients at first recurrence. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive either 500 or 2,000 mg of cilengitide twice weekly on a continuous basis. Patients were assessed every 4 weeks. The primary end point was 6-month progression-free survival (PFS) rate. Secondary end points included PFS, overall survival (OS), and radiographic response, as well as quality-of-life and pharmacokinetic assessments. RESULTS: Eighty-one patients were enrolled, including 41 on the 500-mg arm and 40 on the 2,000-mg arm. The safety profile of cilengitide was excellent, with no significant reproducible toxicities observed on either arm. Antitumor activity was observed in both treatment cohorts but trended more favorably among patients treated with 2,000 mg, including a 6-month PFS of 15% and a median OS of 9.9 months. CONCLUSION: Cilengitide monotherapy is well tolerated and exhibits modest antitumor activity among recurrent GBM patients. Additional studies integrating cilengitide into combinatorial regimens for GBM are warranted.

Cisplatin, methotrexate and bleomycin for treating advanced penile carcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: To retrospectively evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of chemotherapy with cisplatinum, methotrexate and bleomycin (CMB) in the adjuvant and palliative setting, and its effect on survival in patients with locally advanced or metastatic penile carcinoma, which carries a very poor prognosis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirteen patients (mean age 54 years) with radically resected local and nodal disease (eight), metastatic disease (two) or metastatic recurrence (three) had chemotherapy with CMB between February 1996 and July 2003. In all, 45 treatment courses were given, with a mean (range) of 3.5 (2-6) courses per patient. RESULTS: Three of the eight patients with adjuvant treatment showed no evidence of disease after a mean (range) of 54 (41-76) months, while four in this group died from disease progression after a mean of 11 (5-20) months, and one died from treatment-related toxicity. All five patients with metastatic disease died from disease progression after three had shown temporary signs of regression. CONCLUSIONS: Chemotherapy with CMB had little effect on metastatic penile cancer and responses were transient. However, patients with minimal disease after radical local and lymphatic resection seemed to benefit from adjuvant therapy, but the toxicity was high and carried a risk of death.

Expression of Ki-67 in squamous cell carcinoma of the penis.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the Ki-67 labelling index (LI) as a prognostic factor for the outcome of penile carcinoma, as in squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the larynx the expression of this marker correlates with histological features indicative of prognosis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analysed the records of 44 patients in whom primary SCC of the penis was treated with amputation and bilateral lymphadenectomy (pT1, in 24, pT2 in 20, pN+ in 10; G1 in 12, G2 in 28 and G3 in four). During a mean follow-up of 35.6 months, four patients had disease progression. Tumour tissue was stained immunohistochemically using the streptavidin-biotin method. The mean Ki-67 LI was defined as the percentage of total tumour cells that were Ki-67-positive. The results were compared with pathological tumour stage, grade, nodal status and clinical disease progression. RESULTS: The mean (range) Ki-67 LI was 40.5 (6.4-93.0)%; a high mean Ki-67 LI was significantly inversely correlated with tumour differentiation (P < 0.005) and there was a tendency for a high Ki-67 LI to be associated with advanced local tumour stage, nodal metastasis and clinical disease progression, but these correlations were not statistically significant (P = 0.07, 0.07 and 0.06, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The Ki-67 LI is correlated with tumour grade in penile cancer, and may indicate a greater risk of nodal metastasis.

Cetuximab y quimioterapia como tratamiento inicial para el cáncer colorrectal metastásico / Cetuximab and quimiotherapy as inicial treatment for metastasic colorrectal cancer

Antecedentes: Se investigó la eficacia de cetuximab más irinotecan, fluorouracilo y leucovorina (FOLFIRI) como tratamiento metastásico y las asociaciones buscadas entre el estado de mutación del gen KRAS en tumores y la respuesta clínica a cetuximab. Métodos: Se asignaro en forma aleatoria pacientes con cáncer colorrectal con expresión positiva del receptor de factor de crecimiento epidérmico, con metástasis irresecables para recibir FOLFIRI, ya sea solo o en combinación con cetuximab. El criterio de valoración primario fue la supervivencia libre de progresión. Conclusión: El tratamiento de primera línea con cetuximab más FOLFIRI, comparado con FOLFIRI solo, redujo el riesgo de progresión del cáncer colorrectal metastásico. El beneficio de cetuximab resultó limitado para pacientes con tumores con KRAS no mutado.(AU)

Cetuximab y quimioterapia como tratamiento inicial para el cáncer colorrectal metastásico / Cetuximab and quimiotherapy as inicial treatment for metastasic colorrectal cancer

Antecedentes: Se investigó la eficacia de cetuximab más irinotecan, fluorouracilo y leucovorina (FOLFIRI) como tratamiento metastásico y las asociaciones buscadas entre el estado de mutación del gen KRAS en tumores y la respuesta clínica a cetuximab. Métodos: Se asignaro en forma aleatoria pacientes con cáncer colorrectal con expresión positiva del receptor de factor de crecimiento epidérmico, con metástasis irresecables para recibir FOLFIRI, ya sea solo o en combinación con cetuximab. El criterio de valoración primario fue la supervivencia libre de progresión. Conclusión: El tratamiento de primera línea con cetuximab más FOLFIRI, comparado con FOLFIRI solo, redujo el riesgo de progresión del cáncer colorrectal metastásico. El beneficio de cetuximab resultó limitado para pacientes con tumores con KRAS no mutado.