Cabozantinib and Panitumumab for RAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

LESSONS LEARNED: Antitumor activity was observed in the study population. Dose modifications of cabozantinib improve long-term tolerability. Biomarkers are needed to identify patient populations most likely to benefit. Further study of cabozantinib with or without panitumumab in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer is warranted. BACKGROUND: The epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) antibody panitumumab is active in patients with RAS wild-type (WT) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), but nearly all patients experience resistance. MET amplification is a driver of panitumumab resistance. Cabozantinib is an inhibitor of multiple kinases, including vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2 (VEGFR2) and c-MET, and may delay or reverse anti-EGFR resistance. METHODS: In this phase Ib clinical trial, we established the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of cabozantinib and panitumumab. We then treated an expansion cohort to further describe the tolerability and clinical activity of the RP2D. Eligibility included patients with KRAS WT mCRC (later amended to include only RAS WT mCRC) who had received prior treatment with a fluoropyrimidine, oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and bevacizumab. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients were enrolled and treated. The MTD/RP2D was cabozantinib 60 mg p.o. daily and panitumumab 6 mg/kg I.V. every 2 weeks. The objective response rate (ORR) was 16%. Median progression free survival (PFS) was 3.7 months (90% confidence interval [CI], 2.3-7.1). Median overall survival (OS) was 12.1 months (90% CI, 7.5-14.3). Five patients (20%) discontinued treatment due to toxicity, and 18 patients (72%) required a dose reduction of cabozantinib. CONCLUSION: The combination of cabozantinib and panitumumab has activity. Dose reductions of cabozantinib improve tolerability.

An initial genetic analysis of gemcitabine-induced high-grade neutropenia in pancreatic cancer patients in CALGB 80303 (Alliance).

OBJECTIVES: One of the standard of care regimens for advanced pancreatic cancer is gemcitabine-based chemotherapy. The efficacy of gemcitabine is limited by dose-limiting hematologic toxicities especially neutropenia. Uncovering the variability of these toxicities attributed to germline DNA variation is of great importance. PATIENTS AND METHODS: CALGB 80303 was a randomized study in advanced pancreatic cancer patients treated with gemcitabine with or without bevacizumab. The study protocol included genotyping of genes of gemcitabine disposition (CDA, DCTD, SLC29A1, SLC28A1, and SLC29A2), as well as a genome-wide analysis. The clinical phenotype was time to early high-grade neutropenia event accounting for progression or death or other treatment-terminating adverse events as competing for informative events. The inference was carried out on the basis of the association between genotype and cause-specific hazard of a neutropenic event. RESULTS: The primary analyses were carried out on the basis of 294 genetically estimated European pancreatic cancer patients. For CDA rs2072671 (A>C), AC and CC patients had a lower risk of neutropenia than AA patients (P=0.01, hazard ratio: 0.61, 95% confidence interval: 0.41-0.89). For SLC28A1 rs3825876 (G>A), AA patients have a higher risk of neutropenia than GA and GG patients (P=0.02, hazard ratio: 1.51, 95% confidence interval: 1.06-2.16). CDA rs2072671 was associated with increased mRNA expression in whole blood in three studies (P=2.7e-14, 6.61e-62, and 9.70e-65). In the genome-wide analysis, variants in TGFB2 were among the top hits (lowest P=1.62e-06) but had no effect in luciferase assays. CONCLUSION: This is the first genetic analysis of gemcitabine-induced neutropenia using a competing risk model in a prospective randomized clinical study has proposed a potentially novel mechanism of the protective effect of the CDA rs2072671 variant. Further confirmation is needed.

Phase II Randomized Trial of Sequential or Concurrent FOLFOXIRI-Bevacizumab Versus FOLFOX-Bevacizumab for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer (STEAM).

BACKGROUND: First-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) typically entails a biologic such as bevacizumab (BEV) with 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin/oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) or 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin/irinotecan (FOLFIRI). STEAM (NCT01765582) assessed the efficacy of BEV plus FOLFOX/FOLFIRI (FOLFOXIRI), administered concurrently (cFOLFOXIRI-BEV) or sequentially (sFOLFOXIRI-BEV, FOLFOX-BEV alternating with FOLFIRI-BEV), versus FOLFOX-BEV for mCRC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with previously untreated mCRC (n = 280) were randomized 1:1:1 to cFOLFOXIRI-BEV, sFOLFOXIRI-BEV, or FOLFOX-BEV and treated with 4-6-month induction followed by maintenance. Coprimary objectives were overall response rate (ORR; first-line cFOLFOXIRI-BEV vs. FOLFOX-BEV) and progression-free survival (PFS; pooled first-line cFOLFOXIRI-BEV and sFOLFOXIRI-BEV vs. FOLFOX-BEV). Secondary/exploratory objectives included overall survival (OS), liver resection rates, biomarker analyses, and safety. RESULTS: ORR was 72.0%, 72.8%, and 62.1% and median PFS was 11.9, 11.4, and 9.5 months with cFOLFOXIRI-BEV, sFOLFOXIRI-BEV, and FOLFOX-BEV, respectively. OS was similar between arms. ORR between cFOLFOXIRI-BEV and FOLFOX-BEV did not significantly differ (p = .132); thus, the primary ORR endpoint was not met. cFOLFOXIRI-BEV and sFOLFOXIRI-BEV numerically improved ORR and PFS, regardless of RAS status. Median PFS was higher with pooled concurrent and sequential FOLFOXIRI-BEV versus FOLFOX-BEV (11.7 vs. 9.5 months; hazard ratio, 0.7; 90% confidence interval, 0.5-0.9; p < .01). Liver resection rates were 17.2% (cFOLFOXIRI-BEV), 9.8% (sFOLFOXIRI-BEV), and 8.4% (FOLFOX-BEV). Grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were observed in 91.2% (cFOLFOXIRI-BEV), 86.7% (sFOLFOXIRI-BEV), and 85.6% (FOLFOX-BEV) of patients, with no increase in serious chemotherapy-associated TEAEs. CONCLUSION: cFOLFOXIRI-BEV and sFOLFOXIRI-BEV were well tolerated with numerically improved ORR, PFS, and liver resection rates versus FOLFOX-BEV, supporting triplet chemotherapy plus BEV as a first-line treatment option for mCRC. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The combination of first-line FOLFIRI with FOLFOX and bevacizumab (concurrent FOLFOXIRI-BEV) improves clinical outcomes in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) relative to FOLFIRI-BEV or FOLFOX-BEV, but it is thought to be associated with increased toxicity. Alternating treatment of FOLFOX and FOLFIRI (sequential FOLFOXIRI-BEV) could improve tolerability. In the phase II STEAM trial, which is the largest study of FOLFOXIRI-BEV in patients in the U.S., it was found that both concurrent and sequential FOLFOXIRI-BEV are active and well tolerated in patients with previously untreated mCRC, supporting the use of these regimens as potential first-line treatment options for this population.

A phase Ib study of capecitabine and ziv-aflibercept followed by a phase II single-arm expansion cohort in chemotherapy refractory metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients with chemotherapy refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) have a poor prognosis and limited therapeutic options. In this phase Ib/II clinical trial, we established the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase II dose (RPTD) for the combination of capecitabine and ziv-aflibercept, and then we evaluated the efficacy of the combination in patients with chemotherapy refractory metastatic CRC. METHODS: All patients were required to have a Karnofsky Performance Status > 70% and adequate organ function. The phase Ib dose escalation cohort included patients with advanced solid tumors who had progressed on all standard therapies. Using a standard 3 + 3 design, we identified the MTD and RPTD for the combination. Fifty patients with metastatic CRC who had progressed on or were intolerant of a fluoropyrimidine, oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and bevacizumab were then enrolled in a single-arm phase II expansion cohort, and were treated at the RPTD. Prior EGFR antibody therapy was required for subjects with RAS wildtype tumors. The primary endpoint for the expansion cohort was progression-free survival (PFS) at two months. Secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: A total of 63 patients were enrolled and evaluable for toxicity (13 dose escalation; 50 expansion). The MTD and RPTD were: capecitabine 850 mg/m2, P.O. bid, days 1-14, and ziv-aflibercept 6 mg/kg I.V., day 1, of each 21-day cycle. In the expansion cohort, 72% of patients were progression-free at two months (95% confidence interval [CI], 60-84%). Median PFS and OS were 3.9 months (95% CI, 2.3-4.5) and 7.1 months (95% CI: 5.8-10.0), respectively. Among all patients evaluable for toxicity, the most common treatment related adverse events (all grade [%]; grade ≥ 3 [%]) included palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (41%; 6%), hypertension (33%; 22%), and mucositis (19%; 5%). RNA was isolated from archived tumor specimens and gene expression analyses revealed no association between angiogenic biomarkers and clinical outcomes. CONCLUSION: The combination of capecitabine and ziv-aflibercept at the RPTD demonstrated acceptable safety and tolerability. PFS at 2 months in patients with chemotherapy refractory metastatic CRC was significantly greater than that in historical controls, indicating that this combination warrants further study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This clinical trial was registered in the www.clinicaltrials.gov system as NCT01661972 on July 31, 2012.

Impact of primary tumour location on efficacy of bevacizumab plus chemotherapy in metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Two first-line (1L) bevacizumab trials showed the prognostic value of primary tumour location in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). In this retrospective subgroup analysis, further analysis of the predictive effect of bevacizumab is presented. METHODS: Patients with sidedness information from two randomised phase III studies of bevacizumab + chemotherapy (CT) vs CT as 1L mCRC treatment were analysed retrospectively. RESULTS: Sidedness was determined in 1590 (27% right and 73% left) of 2214 patients. Progression-free survival was improved with bevacizumab + CT vs CT in right-sided (HR = 0.75; 95% CI 0.61, 0.93; p = 0.008) and left-sided (HR = 0.76; 95% CI 0.67, 0.86; p < 0.001) mCRC (pooled analysis). Similarly, overall survival was numerically improved with bevacizumab + CT vs CT in right-sided mCRC (HR = 0.82; 95% CI 0.65, 1.03; p = 0.085), and significantly improved in left-sided mCRC (HR = 0.85; 95% CI 0.74, 0.98; p = 0.028). CONCLUSIONS: This analysis indicates that the effect of bevacizumab is independent of tumour location in mCRC.

A Phase I Trial of the IGF-1R Antibody Ganitumab (AMG 479) in Combination with Everolimus (RAD001) and Panitumumab in Patients with Advanced Cancer.

PURPOSE: This study evaluated the maximum tolerated dose or recommended phase II dose (RPTD) and safety and tolerability of the ganitumab and everolimus doublet regimen followed by the ganitumab, everolimus, and panitumumab triplet regimen. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a standard 3 + 3 dose escalation trial. Doublet therapy consisted of ganitumab at 12 mg/kg every 2 weeks; doses of everolimus were adjusted according to dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs). Panitumumab at 4.8 mg/kg every 2 weeks was added to the RPTD of ganitumab and everolimus. DLTs were assessed in cycle 1; toxicity evaluation was closely monitored throughout treatment. Treatment continued until disease progression or undesirable toxicity. Pretreatment and on-treatment skin biopsies were collected to assess insulin-like growth factor 1 receptor and mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) target modulation. RESULTS: Forty-three subjects were enrolled. In the doublet regimen, two DLTs were observed in cohort 1, no DLTs in cohort -1, and one in cohort -1B. The triplet combination was discontinued because of unacceptable toxicity. Common adverse events were thrombocytopenia/neutropenia, skin rash, mucositis, fatigue, and hyperglycemia. In the doublet regimen, two patients with refractory non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) achieved prolonged complete responses ranging from 18 to >60 months; one treatment-naïve patient with chondrosarcoma achieved prolonged stable disease >24 months. In dermal granulation tissue, the insulin-like growth factor receptor and mTOR pathways were potently and specifically inhibited by ganitumab and everolimus, respectively. CONCLUSION: The triplet regimen of ganitumab, everolimus, and panitumumab was associated with unacceptable toxicity. However, the doublet of ganitumab at 12 mg/kg every 2 weeks and everolimus five times weekly had an acceptable safety profile and demonstrated notable clinical activity in patients with refractory NSCLC and sarcoma. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This trial evaluated the maximum tolerated dose or recommended phase II dose and safety and tolerability of the ganitumab and everolimus doublet regimen followed by the ganitumab, everolimus, and panitumumab triplet regimen. Although the triplet regimen of ganitumab, everolimus, and panitumumab was associated with unacceptable toxicity, the doublet of ganitumab at 12 mg/kg every 2 weeks and everolimus at five times weekly had an acceptable safety profile and demonstrated notable clinical activity in patients with refractory non-small cell lung cancer and sarcoma.

Pilot Evaluation of Angiogenesis Signaling Factor Response after Transcatheter Arterial Embolization for Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Purpose To identify changes in a broad panel of circulating angiogenesis factors after bland transcatheter arterial embolization (TAE), a purely ischemic treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Materials and Methods This prospective HIPAA-compliant study was approved by the institutional review board. Informed written consent was obtained from all participants prior to entry into the study. Twenty-five patients (21 men; mean age, 61 years; range, 30-81 years) with Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System category 5 or biopsy-proven HCC and who were undergoing TAE were enrolled from October 15, 2014, through December 2, 2015. Nineteen plasma angiogenesis factors (angiopoietin 2; hepatocyte growth factor; platelet-derived growth factor AA and BB; placental growth factor; vascular endothelial growth factor A and D; vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 1, 2, and 3; osteopontin; transforming growth factor ß1 and ß2; thrombospondin 2; intercellular adhesion molecule 1; interleukin 6 [IL-6]; stromal cell-derived factor 1; tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinases 1; and vascular cell adhesion molecule 1 [VCAM-1]) were measured by using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays at 1 day, 2 weeks, and 5 weeks after TAE and were compared with baseline levels by using paired Wilcoxon tests. Tumor response was assessed according to modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (mRECIST). Angiogenesis factor levels were compared between responders and nonresponders by mRECIST criteria by using unpaired Wilcoxon tests. Results All procedures were technically successful with no complications. Fourteen angiogenesis factors showed statistically significant changes following TAE, but most changes were transient. IL-6 was upregulated only 1 day after the procedure, but showed the largest increases of any factor. Osteopontin and VCAM-1 demonstrated sustained upregulation at all time points following TAE. At 3-month follow-up imaging, 11 patients had responses to TAE (complete response, n = 6; partial response, n = 5) and 11 patients were nonresponders (stable disease, n = 9; progressive disease, n = 2). In nonresponders, the percent change in IL-6 on the day after TAE (P = .033) and the mean percent change in osteopontin after TAE (P = .024) were significantly greater compared with those of responders. Conclusion Multiple angiogenesis factors demonstrated significant upregulation after TAE. VCAM-1 and osteopontin demonstrated sustained upregulation, whereas the rest were transient. IL-6 and osteopontin correlated significantly with radiologic response after TAE. © RSNA, 2017.

Clinical outcomes of patients with advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumors: safety and efficacy in a worldwide treatment-use trial of sunitinib.

BACKGROUND: The objectives of this study were to provide sunitinib to patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) who were otherwise unable to obtain it and to collect broad safety and efficacy data from a large population of patients with advanced GIST after imatinib failure. (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00094029). METHODS: Imatinib-resistant/intolerant patients with advanced GIST received sunitinib on an initial dosing schedule of 50 mg daily in 6-week cycles (4 weeks on treatment, 2 weeks off treatment). Tumor assessment frequency was according to local practice, and response was assessed by investigators according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.0. Overall survival (OS) and safety were assessed regularly. Post hoc analyses evaluated different patterns of treatment management. RESULTS: At final data cutoff, 1124 patients comprised the intent-to-treat population, and 15% of these patients had a baseline Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≥2. The median treatment duration was 7.0 months. The median time to tumor progression was 8.3 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.0-9.4 months), the median OS was 16.6 months (95% CI, 14.9-18.0 months), and 36% of patients were alive at the time of analysis. Patients for whom the initial dosing schedule was modified exhibited longer median OS (23.5 months) than those who were treated strictly according to the initial dosing schedule (11.1 months). The most common treatment-related grade 3 and 4 adverse events were hand-foot syndrome (11%), fatigue (9%), neutropenia (8%), hypertension (7%), and thrombocytopenia (6%). Treatment-related adverse events associated with cardiac function (eg, congestive heart failure and myocardial infarction) were reported at frequencies of ≤1% each. CONCLUSIONS: This treatment-use study confirms the long-term safety and efficacy of sunitinib in a large international population of patients with advanced GIST after imatinib failure.

Treatment of palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (PPE) with topical sildenafil: a pilot study.

PURPOSE: Palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (PPE) is a common chemotherapy and anti-VEGF multi-kinase inhibitor class-related toxicity that often results in debilitating skin changes and often limits the use of active anti-cancer regimens. Mechanistic and anecdotal clinical evidence suggested that topical application of sildenafil cream may help reduce the severity of PPE. Therefore, we conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot study to evaluate the feasibility, safety and efficacy of topical sildenafil cream for the treatment of PPE. METHODS: Eligible subjects were required to have grade 1-3 PPE associated with either capecitabine or sunitinib. Subjects were randomized to receive 1 % topical sildenafil cream to the left extremities or right extremities and placebo cream on the opposite extremity. Two times per day, 0.5 mL of cream was applied to each affected hand/foot. The primary endpoint was improvement in PPE grading at any point on study. Clinical assessments were evaluated by NCI-CTC 4.0 grading and patient self-reported pain. RESULTS: Ten subjects were enrolled, nine were evaluable for safety and efficacy. Five of nine subjects reported some improvement in foot pain and three of eight subjects for hand pain improvement. One of these subjects noted specific improvement in tactile function. No treatment-related toxicities were observed. CONCLUSIONS: In this limited, single-center study, topical cream containing 1 % sildenafil is feasible to administer, is well-tolerated, and may mitigate PPE-related symptoms due to anti-cancer therapeutic agents. Further validation is necessary.

Effects of the combination of TRC105 and bevacizumab on endothelial cell biology.

Endoglin, or CD105, is a cell membrane glycoprotein that is overexpressed on proliferating endothelial cells (EC), including those found in malignancies and choroidal neovascularization. Endoglin mediates the transition from quiescent endothelium, characterized by the relatively dominant state of Smad 2/3 phosphorylation, to active angiogenesis by preferentially phosphorylating Smad 1/5/8. The monoclonal antibody TRC105 binds endoglin with high avidity and is currently being tested in phase 1b and phase 2 clinical trials. In this report, we evaluated the effects of TRC105 on primary human umbilical vascular endothelial cells (HUVEC) as a single agent and in combination with bevacizumab. As single agents, both TRC105 and bevacizumab efficiently blocked HUVEC tube formation, and the combination of both agents achieved even greater levels of inhibition. We further assessed the effects of each drug on various aspects of HUVEC function. While bevacizumab was observed to inhibit HUVEC viability in nutrient-limited medium, TRC105 had little effect on HUVEC viability, either alone or in combination with bevacizumab. Additionally, both drugs inhibited HUVEC migration and induced apoptosis. At the molecular level, TRC105 treatment of HUVEC lead to decreased Smad 1/5/8 phosphorylation in response to BMP-9, a primary ligand for endoglin. Together, these results indicate that TRC105 acts as an effective anti-angiogenic agent alone and in combination with bevacizumab.

A phase I clinical trial of navitoclax, a targeted high-affinity Bcl-2 family inhibitor, in combination with gemcitabine in patients with solid tumors.

PURPOSE: To investigate the safety, optimal dosing, pharmacokinetics and clinical activity of a regimen of navitoclax (ABT-263) combined with gemcitabine in patients with solid tumors. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Patients with solid tumors for which gemcitabine was deemed an appropriate therapy were enrolled into one of two different dosing schedules (21-day dosing schedule: navitoclax administered orally on days 1-3 and 8-10,; and gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8; 28-day dosing schedule: navitoclax administrated orally on days 1-3, 8-10, and 15-17; and gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8 and 15). Navitoclax doses were escalated from 150 to 425 mg. An expanded safety cohort was conducted for the 21-day dosing schedule at the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of navitoclax. RESULTS: Forty-six patients were enrolled at three U.S. centers. The most common adverse events included: hematologic abnormalities (thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, and anemia), liver enzyme elevations (ALT and AST), and gastrointestinal disturbances (diarrhea, nausea, and vomiting). Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) observed in cycle 1 were grade 4 thrombocytopenia (2 patients), grade 4 neutropenia (1 patient), and grade 3 AST elevation (2 patients). The MTD of navitoclax was 325 mg co-administered with gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) for the 21-day schedule. No clinically significant pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions were observed. There were no objective responses. Stable disease, reported at the end of cycle 2, was the best response in 54 % of evaluable patients (n = 39). CONCLUSIONS: The combination of navitoclax 325 mg with gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) was generally well tolerated and exhibited a favorable safety profile in patients with advanced solid tumors.

Phase I study of dasatinib in combination with capecitabine, oxaliplatin and bevacizumab followed by an expanded cohort in previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer.

PURPOSE: Dasatinib inhibits src family kinases and has anti-angiogenic properties. We conducted a phase I study of dasatinib, capecitabine, oxaliplatin, and bevacizumab (CapeOx/bevacizumab), with an expansion cohort in metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). METHODS: Patients were enrolled in a dose escalation cohort to establish the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and the recommended phase II dose (RP2D). Using a "3 + 3" design, twelve patients with advanced solid tumors received dasatinib (50 mg twice daily or 70 mg daily), capecitabine (850 mg/m(2) twice daily, days 1-14), oxaliplatin (130 mg/m(2) on day 1) and bevacizumab (7.5 mg/kg on day1), every 3 weeks. Ten patients with previously untreated metastatic CRC were then enrolled in an expansion cohort. Activated src (src(act)) expression was measured by immunohistochemistry, using an antibody that selectively recognizes the active conformation of src (clone 28). RESULTS: Twenty-two patients were enrolled between June 2009 and May 2011. Two DLTs were observed in the 50 mg bid dasatinib cohort, and one DLT was observed in the 70 mg daily dasatinib cohort. The MTD and RP2D for dasatinib was 70 mg daily. The most common treatment-related adverse events were fatigue (20; 91 %) and diarrhea (18; 82 %). Biomarker analysis of src(act) expression demonstrated that the overall response rate (ORR) was 75 % (6/8) for patients with high src(act) expression (IHC ≥ 2), compared to 0 % (0/8) for patients with low srcact expression (IHC 0 or 1); (p = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: The RP2D of dasatinib is 70 mg daily in combination with CapeOx/bevacizumab. High levels of srcact expression may predict those patients most likely to benefit from dasatinib.

Phase I study of capecitabine, oxaliplatin, bevacizumab, and everolimus in advanced solid tumors.

PURPOSE: To define maximum tolerated dose (MTD), toxicities, and pharmacodynamics of capecitabine, oxaliplatin, bevacizumab, and everolimus in advanced solid tumor patients. DESIGN: This was a standard "3 + 3" dose-escalation trial. All subjects received bevacizumab 7.5 mg/kg on day 1 of each cycle. Doses for capecitabine, oxaliplatin and everolimus were modified per dose limiting toxicity (DLT). Baseline and on-treatment plasma biomarkers were analyzed. Archived tumor mRNA levels were evaluated for NRP1, NRP2 and VEGF-A isoforms. RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients were evaluable for toxicity and 30 for efficacy. Two DLTs were observed in cohort 1 and one DLT each was observed in cohort -1 and -1b. Grade ≥3 toxicities included neutropenia, hypertension, perforation/fistula/hemorrhage, hypertriglyceridemia, diarrhea, and thromboembolism. Twelve subjects experienced partial response (PR); 12 had stable disease as best response. Three of seven chemorefractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) subjects experienced PR; 8 of 15 chemonaive mCRC subjects experienced PR. Plasma TßRIII and IL-6 increased on treatment but without correlation to outcome. Increased VEGF165 levels significantly correlated with longer progression free survival. CONCLUSIONS: Everolimus with full dose capecitabine, oxaliplatin, and bevacizumab had unacceptable toxicity. MTD was: everolimus 5 mg daily; capecitabine 680 mg/m(2) BID days 1-14; oxaliplatin 100 mg/m(2) and bevacizumab 7.5 mg/kg, day 1. Activity was noted in mCRC.

The search for biomarkers to direct antiangiogenic treatment in epithelial ovarian cancer.

Antiangiogenic agents have demonstrated improved progression-free survival in women with primary and recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). Biomarkers that predict outcomes in patients treated with antiangiogenic agents are being investigated to rationally direct therapy for women most likely to benefit from these agents. Among the most promising plasma-based biomarkers are vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-A, fibroblast growth factor, platelet-derived growth factor, angiopoietin-2, and VEGF receptor-2. While these biomarkers have been correlated with prognosis, they have not been shown to predict benefit, specifically from anti-VEGF therapy, highlighting the need for alternative biomarkers, including molecular and clinical factors, which may be predictive of outcome in women with ovarian cancer treated with antiangiogenic agents. Biomarkers are currently being investigated as secondary outcomes in several ongoing phase II and phase III clinical trials of antiangiogenic agents in patients with EOC. Molecular techniques, such as microarray analyses, and imaging techniques, such as dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging, positron emission tomography, and single photon emission computed tomography, are also being explored in this field. In this review, we provide a comprehensive overview of current biomarker research, with an emphasis on angiogenic biomarkers associated with EOC.

Palliative treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: what is the optimal approach?

Worldwide, colorectal cancer (CRC) is responsible for over 600,000 deaths annually and remains a significant public health concern. Because of therapeutic advancements over the past two decades, patients with metastatic CRC are living longer with an improved quality of life. This review will highlight recent trial evidence that improves outcomes for patients with metastatic disease. Topics will include the optimal use of first-line combination chemotherapy, bevacizumab in patients with advanced age or comorbidities, maintenance chemotherapy, first-line use of anti-EGFR therapies, first-line cetuximab versus bevacizumab, anti-angiogenic therapies past progression, and management of treatment-refractory disease. Clinical trial evidence will be presented, along with guidance on how to integrate recent evidence into clinical practice. Finally, this review will examine innovative drug development strategies, and will discuss potentially actionable targets identified by molecular testing.

Bevacizumab exposure beyond first disease progression in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: analyses of the ARIES observational cohort study.

PURPOSE: This analysis from Avastin® Registries: Investigation of Effectiveness and Safety (ARIES) examined the association between exposure to bevacizumab after disease progression (PD) and postprogression survival (PPS) in bevacizumab-exposed metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) through the application of time-dependent and time-fixed analytical methods. METHODS: Patients with mCRC who were treated with first-line bevacizumab and who survived first PD (PD1) were included. A time-dependent Cox regression model was fitted to assess the effect of cumulative bevacizumab exposure on PPS, while controlling for potential confounders. In addition to support findings from previous studies, a modified intent-to-treat (mITT) analysis compared PPS in patients who received bevacizumab beyond disease progression (BBP) with those who did not (No-BBP). RESULTS: Of 1550 patients, 1199 survived PD1 and had a median PPS of 13.4 months. Cumulative bevacizumab exposure was associated with improved PPS (p = 0.0040). After adjusting for confounders, the hazard ratios (HRs) for PPS decreased, on average, by 1.2% (range, 1.1-1.3%) with each additional dose of bevacizumab. In the mITT analysis, the median PPS for BBP (n = 438) was 14.4 months vs 10.6 months with for No-BBP (n = 667). BBP was found to be independently associated with longer PPS in a multivariable Cox regression analysis (HR, 0.84; 95% confidence interval, 0.73-0.97). Protocol-specified adverse events suspected to be associated with bevacizumab occurred in 13.0% of patients with BBP. CONCLUSION: This analysis supports the observation that bevacizumab exposure after PD1 is associated with longer PPS in mCRC.

Metastatic ampullary adenocarcinoma presenting as a hydrocele: a case report.

CONTEXT: Metastases from ampullary malignancies are common, but spread to the testicle and paratesticular tissue is exceedingly rare with only 2 reported cases in the literature. CASE REPORT: We report a case of a 70 year-old male with a history of ampullary adenocarcinoma status post pancreaticoduodenectomy who presented with a symptomatic right-sided hydrocele. Subsequent pathology revealed metastatic ampullary adenocarcinoma. CONCLUSIONS: Metastasis to the testicle and paratesticular tissue from ampullary malignancies is rare, but must be considered in the evaluation of scrotal masses in patients with a history of ampullary malignancy.

Prognostic value of liver metastases in colorectal cancer treated by systemic therapy: An ARCAD pooled analysis.

BACKGROUND: The liver is the most frequent site of metastases in colorectal cancer (CRC). This study aimed to assess the response rate and survival outcomes in metastatic CRC patients with non-liver metastases (NLM) compared to those with liver metastases (LM) across different lines of treatment. METHODS: A total of 17,924 mCRC patients included in 26 trials from the ARCAD CRC database were analyzed. The analysis was conducted based on the presence or absence of LM across different treatment groups: chemotherapy (CT) alone, CT + anti-VEGF, CT + anti-EGFR in KRAS wild-type tumors, within the first-line (1 L) and second-line (2 L), and patients enrolled in third-line (≥3 L) trials treated with trifluridine/tipiracil or regorafenib or placebo. The endpoints were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall response rate (ORR). RESULTS: Out of the 17,924 patients, 14,066 had LM (30.6 % with only liver involvement and 69.4 % with liver and other metastatic sites), while 3858 patients had NLM. In the CT alone and CT + anti-VEGF subgroups, NLM patients showed better OS and PFS in the 1 L and 2 L settings. However, in the CT + anti-EGFR 1 L and 2 L subgroups, there was no significant difference in OS and PFS between NLM and LM patients. In the ≥ 3 L subgroups, better OS and PFS were observed in NLM patients. ORRs were higher in LM patients than in NLM patients across all cohorts treated in the 1 L and only in the anti-EGFR cohort in the 2 L. CONCLUSION: LM is a poor prognostic factor for mCRC increasing from 1 L to ≥ 3 L except for patients in 1 L and 2 L receiving CT+anti-EGFR. These data justify using LM as a stratification factor in future trials for patients with unresectable mCRC.

Efficacy and safety of bevacizumab in metastatic colorectal cancer: pooled analysis from seven randomized controlled trials.

PURPOSE: his analysis pooled individual patient data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to more thoroughly examine clinical outcomes when adding bevacizumab to chemotherapy for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patient data were pooled from the first-line AVF2107, NO16966, ARTIST, AVF0780, AVF2192, and AGITG MAX RCTs and the second-line E3200 RCT. All analyses were based on the intent-to-treat population. To assess differences in time-to-event variables by treatment (chemotherapy with or without placebo vs. chemotherapy plus bevacizumab), stratified random-effects (overall) and fixed-effects (subgroup comparisons) models were used to estimate pooled hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: The analysis population comprised 3,763 patients (1,773 chemotherapy with or without placebo; 1,990 chemotherapy plus bevacizumab). The addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy was associated with statistically significant increases in overall survival (OS; HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.71-0.90) and progression-free survival (PFS; HR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.46-0.71). The effects on OS and PFS across subgroups defined by chemotherapy backbone (oxaliplatin-based, irinotecan-based), extent of disease (liver metastases only, extensive disease), age (<65, ≥65 years), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (0, ≥1), and KRAS status (wild-type, mutant) were consistent with the overall analysis. Incidence rates of grade ≥3 hypertension, proteinuria, bleeding, wound-healing complications, gastrointestinal perforations, and thromboembolic events were increased with bevacizumab treatment. CONCLUSION: The use of bevacizumab with chemotherapy resulted in statistically significant increases in OS and PFS for patients with mCRC. The PFS benefit extended across the clinically relevant subgroups examined. The observed safety profile of bevacizumab was consistent with that reported in individual trials.

Analysis of early hypertension and clinical outcome with bevacizumab: results from seven phase III studies.

BACKGROUND: Hypertension is associated with antivascular endothelial growth factor treatment, but the clinical implications of hypertension are uncertain. To assess the prognostic and predictive value of bevacizumab-related hypertension, a comprehensive analysis of whether hypertension and efficacy outcomes are associated was conducted on seven company-sponsored placebo-controlled phase III studies of bevacizumab. METHODS: Patient-specific data were available from 6,486 patients with metastatic colorectal, breast, non-small cell lung, pancreatic, and renal cell cancers. Primary hypertension endpoint was a blood pressure (BP) increase of >20 mmHg systolic or >10 mmHg diastolic within the first 60 days of treatment. Additional endpoints included other predefined thresholds of change in BP and severity of hypertension graded using the National Cancer Institute's Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. To analyze the general prognostic importance of an early BP increase, multivariate Cox regression models were used to assess the correlation between BP changes and progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) outcomes in the control groups. To analyze whether early BP increases could predict for benefit from bevacizumab, similar analyses were conducted in the bevacizumab-treated and control groups. RESULTS: In six of seven studies, early BP increase was neither predictive of clinical benefit from bevacizumab nor prognostic for the course of the disease. For study AVF2107g, early increased BP was associated with longer PFS and OS times in the bevacizumab group but shorter OS time in the control group. CONCLUSIONS: Early treatment-related BP increases do not predict clinical benefit from bevacizumab based on PFS or OS outcomes. BP increases do not appear to have general prognostic importance for patients with advanced cancer.