RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The combination of pembrolizumab and axitinib showed antitumor activity in a phase 1b trial involving patients with previously untreated advanced renal-cell carcinoma. Whether pembrolizumab plus axitinib would result in better outcomes than sunitinib in such patients was unclear. METHODS: In an open-label, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned 861 patients with previously untreated advanced clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma to receive pembrolizumab (200 mg) intravenously once every 3 weeks plus axitinib (5 mg) orally twice daily (432 patients) or sunitinib (50 mg) orally once daily for the first 4 weeks of each 6-week cycle (429 patients). The primary end points were overall survival and progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. The key secondary end point was the objective response rate. All reported results are from the protocol-specified first interim analysis. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 12.8 months, the estimated percentage of patients who were alive at 12 months was 89.9% in the pembrolizumab-axitinib group and 78.3% in the sunitinib group (hazard ratio for death, 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.38 to 0.74; P<0.0001). Median progression-free survival was 15.1 months in the pembrolizumab-axitinib group and 11.1 months in the sunitinib group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.57 to 0.84; P<0.001). The objective response rate was 59.3% (95% CI, 54.5 to 63.9) in the pembrolizumab-axitinib group and 35.7% (95% CI, 31.1 to 40.4) in the sunitinib group (P<0.001). The benefit of pembrolizumab plus axitinib was observed across the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium risk groups (i.e., favorable, intermediate, and poor risk) and regardless of programmed death ligand 1 expression. Grade 3 or higher adverse events of any cause occurred in 75.8% of patients in the pembrolizumab-axitinib group and in 70.6% in the sunitinib group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with previously untreated advanced renal-cell carcinoma, treatment with pembrolizumab plus axitinib resulted in significantly longer overall survival and progression-free survival, as well as a higher objective response rate, than treatment with sunitinib. (Funded by Merck Sharp & Dohme; KEYNOTE-426 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02853331.).
Assuntos
Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados/administração & dosagem , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapêutico , Axitinibe/administração & dosagem , Carcinoma de Células Renais/tratamento farmacológico , Neoplasias Renais/tratamento farmacológico , Receptor de Morte Celular Programada 1/antagonistas & inibidores , Sunitinibe/uso terapêutico , Administração Intravenosa , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados/efeitos adversos , Antineoplásicos/uso terapêutico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efeitos adversos , Axitinibe/efeitos adversos , Carcinoma de Células Renais/mortalidade , Feminino , Humanos , Análise de Intenção de Tratamento , Neoplasias Renais/mortalidade , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Intervalo Livre de Progressão , Método Simples-Cego , Sunitinibe/efeitos adversos , Taxa de SobrevidaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The first interim analysis of the KEYNOTE-426 study showed superior efficacy of pembrolizumab plus axitinib over sunitinib monotherapy in treatment-naive, advanced renal cell carcinoma. The exploratory analysis with extended follow-up reported here aims to assess long-term efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab plus axitinib versus sunitinib monotherapy in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. METHODS: In the ongoing, randomised, open-label, phase 3 KEYNOTE-426 study, adults (≥18 years old) with treatment-naive, advanced renal cell carcinoma with clear cell histology were enrolled in 129 sites (hospitals and cancer centres) across 16 countries. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive 200 mg pembrolizumab intravenously every 3 weeks for up to 35 cycles plus 5 mg axitinib orally twice daily or 50 mg sunitinib monotherapy orally once daily for 4 weeks per 6-week cycle. Randomisation was done using an interactive voice response system or integrated web response system, and was stratified by International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium risk status and geographical region. Primary endpoints were overall survival and progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Since the primary endpoints were met at the first interim analysis, updated data are reported with nominal p values. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02853331. FINDINGS: Between Oct 24, 2016, and Jan 24, 2018, 861 patients were randomly assigned to receive pembrolizumab plus axitinib (n=432) or sunitinib monotherapy (n=429). With a median follow-up of 30·6 months (IQR 27·2-34·2), continued clinical benefit was observed with pembrolizumab plus axitinib over sunitinib in terms of overall survival (median not reached with pembrolizumab and axitinib vs 35·7 months [95% CI 33·3-not reached] with sunitinib); hazard ratio [HR] 0·68 [95% CI 0·55-0·85], p=0·0003) and progression-free survival (median 15·4 months [12·7-18·9] vs 11·1 months [9·1-12·5]; 0·71 [0·60-0·84], p<0·0001). The most frequent (≥10% patients in either group) treatment-related grade 3 or worse adverse events were hypertension (95 [22%] of 429 patients in the pembrolizumab plus axitinib group vs 84 [20%] of 425 patients in the sunitinib group), alanine aminotransferase increase (54 [13%] vs 11 [3%]), and diarrhoea (46 [11%] vs 23 [5%]). No new treatment-related deaths were reported since the first interim analysis. INTERPRETATION: With extended study follow-up, results from KEYNOTE-426 show that pembrolizumab plus axitinib continues to have superior clinical outcomes over sunitinib. These results continue to support the first-line treatment with pembrolizumab plus axitinib as the standard of care of advanced renal cell carcinoma. FUNDING: Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp, a subsidiary of Merck & Co, Inc.
Assuntos
Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados/administração & dosagem , Antineoplásicos Imunológicos/administração & dosagem , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/administração & dosagem , Axitinibe/administração & dosagem , Carcinoma de Células Renais/tratamento farmacológico , Neoplasias Renais/tratamento farmacológico , Inibidores de Proteínas Quinases/administração & dosagem , Sunitinibe/administração & dosagem , Idoso , Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados/efeitos adversos , Antineoplásicos Imunológicos/efeitos adversos , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efeitos adversos , Axitinibe/efeitos adversos , Carcinoma de Células Renais/mortalidade , Carcinoma de Células Renais/patologia , Feminino , Humanos , Neoplasias Renais/mortalidade , Neoplasias Renais/patologia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Intervalo Livre de Progressão , Inibidores de Proteínas Quinases/efeitos adversos , Sunitinibe/efeitos adversos , Fatores de TempoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction cancer that progresses on chemotherapy have poor outcomes. We compared pembrolizumab with paclitaxel in patients with advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction cancer that progressed on first-line chemotherapy with a platinum and fluoropyrimidine. METHODS: This randomised, open-label, phase 3 study was done at 148 medical centres in 30 countries. Eligible patients were randomised (1:1) in blocks of four per stratum with an interactive voice-response and integrated web-response system to receive either pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks for up to 2 years or standard-dose paclitaxel. Primary endpoints were overall survival and progression-free survival in patients with a programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) combined positive score (CPS) of 1 or higher. Safety was assessed in all patients, irrespective of CPS. The significance threshold for overall survival was p=0·0135 (one-sided). This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02370498. FINDINGS: Between June 4, 2015, and July 26, 2016, 592 patients were enrolled. Of the 395 patients who had a PD-L1 CPS of 1 or higher, 196 patients were assigned to receive pembrolizumab and 199 patients were assigned to receive paclitaxel. As of Oct 26, 2017, 326 patients in the population with CPS of 1 or higher had died (151 [77%] of 196 patients in the pembrolizumab group and 175 [88%] of 199 patients in the paclitaxel group). Median overall survival was 9·1 months (95% CI 6·2-10·7) with pembrolizumab and 8·3 months (7·6-9·0) with paclitaxel (hazard ratio [HR] 0·82, 95% CI 0·66-1·03; one-sided p=0·0421). Median progression-free survival was 1·5 months (95% CI 1·4-2·0) with pembrolizumab and 4·1 months (3·1-4·2) with paclitaxel (HR 1·27, 95% CI 1·03-1·57). In the total population, grade 3-5 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 42 (14%) of the 294 patients treated with pembrolizumab and 96 (35%) of the 276 patients treated with paclitaxel. INTERPRETATION: Pembrolizumab did not significantly improve overall survival compared with paclitaxel as second-line therapy for advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction cancer with PD-L1 CPS of 1 or higher. Pembrolizumab had a better safety profile than paclitaxel. Additional trials of pembrolizumab in gastric and gastro-oesophageal cancer are ongoing. FUNDING: Merck Sharp & Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck & Co.
Assuntos
Adenocarcinoma/tratamento farmacológico , Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados/uso terapêutico , Neoplasias Esofágicas/tratamento farmacológico , Junção Esofagogástrica , Paclitaxel/uso terapêutico , Neoplasias Gástricas/tratamento farmacológico , Adenocarcinoma/mortalidade , Adenocarcinoma/patologia , Idoso , Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados/efeitos adversos , Neoplasias Esofágicas/mortalidade , Neoplasias Esofágicas/patologia , Junção Esofagogástrica/patologia , Feminino , Humanos , Infusões Intravenosas , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estadiamento de Neoplasias , Paclitaxel/efeitos adversos , Neoplasias Gástricas/patologia , Taxa de Sobrevida , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Pancreatic Cancer remains a lethal disease for the majority of patients. New chemotherapy agents such as Folfirinox offer therapeutic potential for patients who present with Borderline Resectable disease (BRPC). However, results to date are inconsistent, with factors such as malnutrition limiting successful drug delivery. We sought to determine the prevalence of sarcopenia in BRPC patients at diagnosis, and to quantify body composition change during chemotherapy. METHODS: The diagnostic/restaging CT scans of BRPC patients were analysed. Body composition was measured at L3 using Tomovision Slice-O-Matic™. Total muscle and adipose tissue mass were estimated using validated regression equations. Sarcopenia was defined as per gender- and body mass index (BMI)-specific lumbar skeletal muscle index (LSMI) and muscle attenuation reference values. RESULTS: Seventy-eight patients received neo-adjuvant chemotherapy, and 67 patients underwent restaging CT, at which point a third were deemed resectable. Half were sarcopenic at diagnosis, and sarcopenia was equally prevalent across all BMI categories.. Skeletal muscle and adipose tissue (intra-muscular, visceral and sub-cutaneous) area decreased during chemotherapy (pâ¯<â¯0.0001). Low muscle attenuation was observed in half of patients at diagnosis, and was associated with increased mortality risk. Loss of lean tissue parameters during chemotherapy was associated with an increased mortality risk; specifically fat-free mass, HR 1.1 (95% CI 1.03-1.17, pâ¯=â¯0.003) and skeletal muscle mass, HR 1.21 (95%CI 1.08-1.35, pâ¯=â¯0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Sarcopenia was prevalent in half of patients at the time of diagnosis with BRPC. Low muscle attenuation at diagnosis, coupled with lean tissue loss during chemotherapy, independently increased mortality risk.
Assuntos
Composição Corporal/efeitos dos fármacos , Terapia Neoadjuvante/efeitos adversos , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/tratamento farmacológico , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/metabolismo , Tecido Adiposo/diagnóstico por imagem , Tecido Adiposo/patologia , Idoso , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica , Índice de Massa Corporal , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Músculo Esquelético/diagnóstico por imagem , Músculo Esquelético/patologia , Avaliação Nutricional , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/mortalidade , Prevalência , Estudos Retrospectivos , Risco , Sarcopenia/epidemiologia , Sarcopenia/etiologia , Sarcopenia/patologia , Tomografia Computadorizada por Raios X , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Immune Modulation and Gemcitabine Evaluation-1, a randomised, open-label, phase II, first-line, proof of concept study (NCT01303172), explored safety and tolerability of IMM-101 (heat-killed Mycobacterium obuense; NCTC 13365) with gemcitabine (GEM) in advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. METHODS: Patients were randomised (2 : 1) to IMM-101 (10 mg ml(-l) intradermally)+GEM (1000 mg m(-2) intravenously; n=75), or GEM alone (n=35). Safety was assessed on frequency and incidence of adverse events (AEs). Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall response rate (ORR) were collected. RESULTS: IMM-101 was well tolerated with a similar rate of AE and serious adverse event reporting in both groups after allowance for exposure. Median OS in the intent-to-treat population was 6.7 months for IMM-101+GEM v 5.6 months for GEM; while not significant, the hazard ratio (HR) numerically favoured IMM-101+GEM (HR, 0.68 (95% CI, 0.44-1.04, P=0.074). In a pre-defined metastatic subgroup (84%), OS was significantly improved from 4.4 to 7.0 months in favour of IMM-101+GEM (HR, 0.54, 95% CI 0.33-0.87, P=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: IMM-101 with GEM was as safe and well tolerated as GEM alone, and there was a suggestion of a beneficial effect on survival in patients with metastatic disease. This warrants further evaluation in an adequately powered confirmatory study.
Assuntos
Antimetabólitos Antineoplásicos/uso terapêutico , Vacinas Anticâncer/uso terapêutico , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/tratamento farmacológico , Desoxicitidina/análogos & derivados , Imunoterapia Ativa , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/tratamento farmacológico , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Antimetabólitos Antineoplásicos/administração & dosagem , Antimetabólitos Antineoplásicos/efeitos adversos , Biomarcadores Tumorais , Vacinas Anticâncer/administração & dosagem , Vacinas Anticâncer/efeitos adversos , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/sangue , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/secundário , Terapia Combinada , Desoxicitidina/administração & dosagem , Desoxicitidina/efeitos adversos , Desoxicitidina/uso terapêutico , Intervalo Livre de Doença , Europa (Continente) , Feminino , Humanos , Estimativa de Kaplan-Meier , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Metástase Neoplásica , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/sangue , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/patologia , Resultado do Tratamento , GencitabinaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Orteronel is an investigational, partially selective inhibitor of CYP 17,20-lyase in the androgen signalling pathway, a validated therapeutic target for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. We assessed orteronel in chemotherapy-naive patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. METHODS: In this phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we recruited patients with progressive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer and no previous chemotherapy from 324 study centres (ie, hospitals or large urologic or group outpatient offices) in 43 countries. Eligible patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either 400 mg orteronel plus 5 mg prednisone twice daily or placebo plus 5 mg prednisone twice daily. Randomisation was done centrally with an interactive voice response system and patients were stratified by region (Europe, North America, and not Europe or North America) and the presence or absence of radiographic disease progression at baseline. The two primary endpoints were radiographic progression-free survival and overall survival, determined in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01193244. FINDINGS: From Oct 31, 2010, to June 29, 2012, 2353 patients were assessed for eligibility. Of those, 1560 were randomly assigned to receive either orteronel plus prednisone (n=781) or placebo plus prednisone (n=779). The clinical cutoff date for the final analysis was Jan 15, 2014 (with 611 deaths). Median follow-up for radiographic progression-free survival was 8·4 months (IQR 3·7-16·6). Median radiographic progression-free survival was 13·8 months (95% CI 13·1-14·9) with orteronel plus prednisone and 8·7 months (8·3-10·9) with placebo plus prednisone (hazard ratio [HR] 0·71, 95% CI 0·63-0·80; p<0·0001). After a median follow-up of 20·7 months (IQR 14·2-25·4), median overall survival was 31·4 months (95% CI 28·6-not estimable) with orteronel plus prednisone and 29·5 months (27·0-not estimable) with placebo plus prednisone (HR 0·92, 95% CI 0·79-1·08; p=0·31). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were increased lipase (137 [17%] of 784 patients in the orteronel plus prednisone group vs 14 [2%] of 770 patients in the placebo plus prednisone group), increased amylase (77 [10%] vs nine [1%]), fatigue (50 [6%] vs 14 [2%]), and pulmonary embolism (40 [5%] vs 27 [4%]). Serious adverse events were reported in 358 [46%] patients receiving orteronel plus prednisone and in 292 [38%] patients receiving placebo plus prednisone. INTERPRETATION: In chemotherapy-naive patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, radiographic progression-free survival was prolonged with orteronel plus prednisone versus placebo plus prednisone. However, no improvement was noted in the other primary endpoint, overall survival. Orteronel plus prednisone was associated with increased toxic effects compared with placebo plus prednisone. On the basis of these and other data, orteronel is not undergoing further development in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. FUNDING: Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc, a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited.
Assuntos
Adenocarcinoma/tratamento farmacológico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapêutico , Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração/tratamento farmacológico , Adenocarcinoma/enzimologia , Adenocarcinoma/mortalidade , Adenocarcinoma/secundário , Idoso , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efeitos adversos , Ásia , Austrália , Inibidores das Enzimas do Citocromo P-450/administração & dosagem , Progressão da Doença , Intervalo Livre de Doença , Método Duplo-Cego , Europa (Continente) , Humanos , Imidazóis/administração & dosagem , Análise de Intenção de Tratamento , Estimativa de Kaplan-Meier , Masculino , Naftalenos/administração & dosagem , Nova Zelândia , América do Norte , Prednisona/administração & dosagem , Modelos de Riscos Proporcionais , Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração/enzimologia , Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração/mortalidade , Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração/patologia , Fatores de Risco , Esteroide 17-alfa-Hidroxilase/antagonistas & inibidores , Esteroide 17-alfa-Hidroxilase/metabolismo , Fatores de Tempo , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) is recommended by international guidelines prior to initiation of systemic anti-cancer treatment (SACT). In practice, CGA is limited by time constraints, lack of resources and expert interpretation. AIMS: The primary objective of this pilot study was to establish the prevalence of frailty (assessed by G8), cognitive impairment (assessed by Mini-Cog), and risk of chemotherapy toxicity (assessed by CARG Chemo-Toxicity Calculator) among patients (pts) ≥65 years commencing SACT. We selected these three screening tools due to the ease of conducting them in a busy outpatient setting. In addition, they have been validated to predict frailty and risk of toxicity from SACT among older adults with cancer. METHODS: Eligible participants were identified from medical oncology clinics. Assessments were conducted in an outpatient setting by treating physicians. Pt records were reviewed to gather demographic and cancer details. Statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS statistical software. RESULTS: Sixty-three participants were enrolled. The mean age of participants was 73yrs (range=65-88). Thirty-three (52.4%) were female and 30 (47.6%) were male. The majority (n=38, 60.3%) had metastatic cancer. The mean G8 score was 11.9 (range=6-19). Eighty-three percent had a G8 score ≤14. Mini-Cog was positive in 13 pts (21%). The mean CARG score was 7.5 (range=0-16), and 80% had a risk of at least 50% grade ≥3 toxicity. Of these, 48 (76.2%) received chemotherapy and 15 (23.8%) received non-cytotoxic SACT. In multi-variate analyses, age, cancer type, treatment type, and disease stage did not impact G8, Mini-Cog, or CARG scores. CONCLUSIONS: Our study has several limitations but suggests that the majority of older adults with cancer would qualify for formal CGA assessment. The risk of high-grade toxicity from SACT is substantial in this cohort. Chronological age was not found to negatively impact pts' frailty, cognition, or risk of toxicity.
Assuntos
Fragilidade , Neoplasias , Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Projetos Piloto , Irlanda , Detecção Precoce de Câncer , Neoplasias/terapia , Avaliação Geriátrica , Cognição , HospitaisRESUMO
BACKGROUND: KEYNOTE-199 (NCT02787005) is a multicohort phase 2 study evaluating pembrolizumab in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Results from cohorts 4 (C4) and 5 (C5) are presented. METHODS: Eligible patients had not received chemotherapy for mCRPC and had responded to enzalutamide prior to developing resistance as defined by Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group 3 guidelines. Patients with RECIST-measurable disease were enrolled in C4, and patients with bone-only or bone-predominant disease were enrolled in C5. All patients received pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks for ≤35 cycles with ongoing enzalutamide until progression, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST v1.1 by blinded independent central review in C4. Secondary end points included disease control rate (DCR), overall survival, and safety in each cohort and both cohorts combined. RESULTS: A total of 126 patients were treated (C4, n = 81; C5, n = 45). Median age was 72 years (range 43-92), and 87.3% had received ≥6 months of enzalutamide prior to study entry. Confirmed ORR was 12.3% (95% CI 6.1-21.5%) for C4. Median duration of response in C4 was 8.1 months (range, 2.5+ to 15.2), and 5 of these patients experienced an objective response lasting ≥6 months. DCR was 53.1% (95% CI 41.7-64.3%) in C4 and 51.1% (95% CI 35.8-66.3%) in C5. Median overall survival was 17.6 months (95% CI 14.0-22.6) in C4 and 20.8 months (95% CI 14.1-28.9) in C5. Grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 35 patients (27.8%); 2 patients in C4 died from immune-related adverse events (myasthenic syndrome and Guillain-Barré syndrome). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of pembrolizumab to ongoing enzalutamide treatment in patients with mCRPC that progressed on enzalutamide after initial response demonstrated modest antitumor activity with a manageable safety profile. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY AND ID: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02787005.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: In the randomized, controlled, phase III KEYNOTE-061 trial, second-line pembrolizumab did not significantly prolong overall survival (OS) versus paclitaxel in patients with PD-L1-positive (combined positive score ≥1) advanced gastric/gastroesophageal junction (G/GEJ) cancer but did elicit a longer duration of response and offered a favorable safety profile. This prespecified exploratory analysis was conducted to evaluate associations between tumor gene expression signatures and clinical outcomes in the phase III KEYNOTE-061 trial. METHODS: Using RNA sequencing data obtained from formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded baseline tumor tissue samples, we evaluated the 18-gene T-cell-inflamed gene expression profile (TcellinfGEP) and 10 non-TcellinfGEP signatures (angiogenesis, glycolysis, granulocytic myeloid-derived suppressor cell (gMDSC), hypoxia, monocytic MDSC (mMDSC), MYC, proliferation, RAS, stroma/epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition/transforming growth factor-ß, WNT). The association between each signature on a continuous scale and outcomes was analyzed using logistic (objective response rate (ORR)) and Cox proportional hazards regression (progression-free survival (PFS) and OS). One-sided (pembrolizumab) and two-sided (paclitaxel) p values were calculated for TcellinfGEP (prespecified α=0.05) and the 10 non-TcellinfGEP signatures (multiplicity-adjusted; prespecified α=0.10). RESULTS: RNA sequencing data were available for 137 patients in each treatment group. TcellinfGEP was positively associated with ORR (p=0.041) and PFS (p=0.026) for pembrolizumab but not paclitaxel (p>0.05). The TcellinfGEP-adjusted mMDSC signature was negatively associated with ORR (p=0.077), PFS (p=0.057), and OS (p=0.033) for pembrolizumab, while the TcellinfGEP-adjusted glycolysis (p=0.018), MYC (p=0.057), and proliferation (p=0.002) signatures were negatively associated with OS for paclitaxel. CONCLUSIONS: This exploratory analysis of tumor TcellinfGEP showed associations with ORR and PFS for pembrolizumab but not for paclitaxel. TcellinfGEP-adjusted mMDSC signature was negatively associated with ORR, PFS, and OS for pembrolizumab but not paclitaxel. These data suggest myeloid-driven suppression may play a role in resistance to PD-1 inhibition in G/GEJ cancer and support a strategy of considering immunotherapy combinations which target this myeloid axis. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02370498.
Assuntos
Paclitaxel , Neoplasias Gástricas , Humanos , Paclitaxel/farmacologia , Paclitaxel/uso terapêutico , Neoplasias Gástricas/tratamento farmacológico , Neoplasias Gástricas/genética , Neoplasias Gástricas/patologia , Transcriptoma , Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados/uso terapêuticoRESUMO
Previous analyses of KEYNOTE-426, an open-label, phase 3 randomized study, showed superior efficacy of first-line pembrolizumab plus axitinib to sunitinib in advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). We report results of the final protocol-prespecified analysis of KEYNOTE-426. Patients received pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every 3 wk plus axitinib 5 mg orally twice daily or sunitinib 50 mg orally once daily (4 wk per 6-wk cycle). The dual primary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) as per RECIST v1.1 by a blinded independent central review. The secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR) and duration of response (DOR). The median study follow-up was 43 (range, 36-51) mo. Benefit with pembrolizumab plus axitinib versus sunitinib was maintained for OS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.73 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.60-0.88]), PFS (HR, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.58-0.80]), and ORR (60% vs 40%). The median DOR was 24 (range, 1.4+ to 43+) versus 15 (range, 2.3-43+) mo in the pembrolizumab plus axitinib versus the sunitinib arm. No new safety signals emerged. These results support pembrolizumab plus axitinib as a standard of care for patients with previously untreated advanced ccRCC. PATIENT SUMMARY: Extended results of KEYNOTE-426 support pembrolizumab plus axitinib as the standard of care for advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma.
Assuntos
Carcinoma de Células Renais , Neoplasias Renais , Humanos , Carcinoma de Células Renais/patologia , Axitinibe/efeitos adversos , Sunitinibe/uso terapêutico , Seguimentos , Neoplasias Renais/patologia , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada AntineoplásicaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The optimum curative approach to adenocarcinoma of the oesophagus and oesophagogastric junction is unknown. We aimed to compare trimodality therapy (preoperative radiotherapy with carboplatin plus paclitaxel [CROSS regimen]) with optimum contemporaneous perioperative chemotherapy regimens (epirubicin plus cisplatin or oxaliplatin plus fluorouracil or capecitabine [a modified MAGIC regimen] before 2018 and fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and docetaxel [FLOT] subsequently). METHODS: Neo-AEGIS (CTRIAL-IE 10-14) was an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial done at 24 centres in Europe. Patients aged 18 years or older with clinical tumour stage T2-3, nodal stage N0-3, and M0 adenocarcinoma of the oesophagus and oesophagogastric junction were randomly assigned to perioperative chemotherapy (three preoperative and three postoperative 3-week cycles of intravenous 50 mg/m2 epirubicin on day 1 plus intravenous 60 mg/m2 cisplatin or intravenous 130 mg/m2 oxaliplatin on day 1 plus continuous infusion of 200 mg/m2 fluorouracil daily or oral 625 mg/m2 capecitabine twice daily up to 2018, with four preoperative and four postoperative 2-week cycles of 2600 mg/m2 fluorouracil, 85 mg/m2 oxaliplatin, 200 mg/m2 leucovorin, and 50 mg/m2 docetaxel intravenously on day 1 as an option from 2018) or trimodality therapy (41·4 Gy in 23 fractions on days 1-5, 8-12, 15-19, 22-26, and 29-31 with intravenous area under the curve 2 mg/mL per min carboplatin plus intravenous 50 mg/m2 paclitaxel on days 1, 8, 15, 22, and 29). The primary endpoint was overall survival, assessed in all randomly assigned patients who received at least one dose of study drug, regardless of which study drug they received, by intention to treat. Secondary endpoints were disease-free survival, site of treatment failure, operative complications, toxicity, pathological response (complete [ypT0N0] and major [tumour regression grade 1 and 2]), margin-free resection (R0), and health-related quality of life. Toxicity and safety data were analysed in the safety population, defined as patients who took at least one dose of study drug, according to treatment actually received. The initial power calculation was based on superiority of trimodality therapy (n=366 patients); it was adjusted after FLOT became an option to a non-inferiority design with a margin of 5% for perioperative chemotherapy (n=540). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01726452. FINDINGS: Between Jan 24, 2013, and Dec 23, 2020, 377 patients were randomly assigned, of whom 362 were included in the intention-to treat population (327 [90%] male and 360 [99%] White): 184 in the perioperative chemotherapy group and 178 in the trimodality therapy group. The trial closed prematurely in December, 2020, after the second interim futility analysis (143 deaths), on the basis of similar survival metrics and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. At a median follow-up of 38·8 months (IQR 16·3-55·1), median overall survival was 48·0 months (95% CI 33·6-64·8) in the perioperative chemotherapy group and 49·2 months (34·8-74·4) in the trimodality therapy group (3-year overall survival 55% [95% CI 47-62] vs 57% [49-64]; hazard ratio 1·03 [95% CI 0·77-1·38]; log-rank p=0·82). Median disease-free survival was 32·4 months (95% CI 22·8-64·8) in the perioperative chemotherapy group and 24·0 months (18·0-40·8) in the trimodality therapy group [hazard ratio 0·89 [95% CI 0·68-1·17]; log-rank p=0·41). The pattern of recurrence, locoregional or systemic, was not significantly different (odds ratio 1·35 [95% CI 0·63-2·91], p=0·44). Pathological complete response (odds ratio 0·33 [95% CI 0·14-0·81], p=0·012), major pathological response (0·21 [0·12-0·38], p<0·0001), and R0 rates (0·21 [0·08-0·53], p=0·0003) favoured trimodality therapy. The most common grade 3-4 adverse event was neutropenia (49 [27%] of 183 patients in the perioperative chemotherapy group vs 11 [6%] of 178 patients in the trimodality therapy group), followed by diarrhoea (20 [11%] vs none), and pulmonary embolism (ten [5%] vs nine [5%]). One (1%) patient in the perioperative chemotherapy group and three (2%) patients in the trimodality therapy group died from serious adverse events, two (one in each group) of which were possibly related to treatment. No differences were seen in operative mortality (five [3%] deaths in the perioperative chemotherapy group vs four [2%] in the trimodality therapy group), major morbidity, or in global health status at 1 and 3 years. INTERPRETATION: Although underpowered and incomplete, Neo-AEGIS provides the largest comprehensive randomised dataset for patients with adenocarcinoma of the oesophagus and oesophagogastric junction treated with perioperative chemotherapy (predominantly the modified MAGIC regimen), and CROSS trimodality therapy, and reports similar 3-year survival and no major differences in operative and health-related quality of life outcomes. We suggest that these data support continued clinical equipoise. FUNDING: Health Research Board, Cancer Research UK, Irish Cancer Society, Oesophageal Cancer Fund, and French National Cancer Institute.
Assuntos
Adenocarcinoma , Neoplasias Esofágicas , Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Capecitabina , Cisplatino , Docetaxel , Oxaliplatina , Epirubicina/uso terapêutico , Leucovorina/uso terapêutico , Carboplatina/uso terapêutico , Qualidade de Vida , Pandemias , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapêutico , Fluoruracila/uso terapêutico , Neoplasias Esofágicas/tratamento farmacológico , Junção Esofagogástrica/patologia , Adenocarcinoma/tratamento farmacológico , Paclitaxel/uso terapêuticoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Pembrolizumab plus axitinib improved efficacy over sunitinib in treatment-naive advanced renal cell carcinoma in the KEYNOTE-426 (NCT02853331) study. However, a relatively high incidence of grade 3/4 aminotransferase elevations was observed. OBJECTIVE: To further characterize treatment-emergent aminotransferase elevations in patients treated with pembrolizumab-axitinib. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Patients enrolled in KEYNOTE-426 were included in this study. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Three Standardized MedDRA Queries for potential hepatic disorders were used to identify patients for the hepatic event analysis subpopulation (HEAS). Alanine aminotransferase events were characterized for time to onset, time to recovery, corticosteroid use, and rechallenge with study treatment(s). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The HEAS comprised 189/429 (44%) pembrolizumab-axitinib patients and 128/425 (30%) sunitinib patients. Grade 3/4 hepatic adverse events were more common in the combination arm: 22% (94/429) versus 7% (29/425); 3% (13/429) discontinued the combination due to hepatic adverse events. In the pembrolizumab-axitinib arm, 125/426 patients (29%) had alanine aminotransferase (ALT) ≥3× upper limit of normal (ULN), with median time to onset of 84 d (range, 7-840 d). Among patients with ALT ≥3× ULN, 120/125 (96%) recovered to <3× ULN following study treatment interruption/discontinuation, with a median time to recovery of 15 d (3-176 d): 68/120 (57%) received corticosteroids. One hundred patients were rechallenged with one or both study treatment(s): 45/100 (45%) had ALT ≥3× ULN recurrence, and all 45 recovered to ALT <3× ULN following study treatment interruption/discontinuation. No fatal hepatic events occurred. CONCLUSIONS: A higher incidence of grade 3/4 aminotransferase elevations occurs with pembrolizumab-axitinib. These events should be carefully evaluated and managed with prompt study treatment interruption or discontinuation, with or without corticosteroid treatment. The decision to rechallenge with one or both drugs should be based on severity of event and thorough causality assessment. PATIENT SUMMARY: Renal cell carcinoma patients receiving pembrolizumab-axitinib are at a higher risk of liver enzyme elevations, which could be reversed with appropriate management.
Assuntos
Carcinoma de Células Renais , Neoplasias Renais , Alanina Transaminase/uso terapêutico , Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados , Axitinibe/uso terapêutico , Carcinoma de Células Renais/tratamento farmacológico , Carcinoma de Células Renais/patologia , Feminino , Humanos , Neoplasias Renais/tratamento farmacológico , Neoplasias Renais/patologia , Masculino , Sunitinibe/efeitos adversosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: In the phase 3 KEYNOTE-426 (NCT02853331) trial, pembrolizumab + axitinib demonstrated improvement in overall survival, progression-free survival, and objective response rate over sunitinib monotherapy for advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in KEYNOTE-426. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 861 patients were randomly assigned to receive pembrolizumab + axitinib (n = 432) or sunitinib (n = 429). HRQoL data were available for 429 patients treated with pembrolizumab + axitinib and 423 patients treated with sunitinib. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: HRQoL end points were measured using the European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Core (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30), EQ-5D visual analog rating scale (VAS), and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Kidney Cancer Symptom Index-Disease-Related Symptoms (FKSI-DRS) questionnaires. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Better or not different overall improvement rates from baseline between pembrolizumab + axitinib and sunitinib were observed for the FKSI-DRS (-0.79% improvement vs sunitinib; 95% confidence interval [CI] -7.2 to 5.6), QLQ-C30 (7.5% improvement vs sunitinib; 95% CI 1.0-14), and EQ-5D VAS (9.9% improvement vs sunitinib; 95% CI 3.2-17). For time to confirmed deterioration (TTcD) and time to first deterioration (TTfD), no differences were observed between arms for the QLQ-C30 (TTcD hazard ratio [HR] 1.0; 95% CI 0.82-1.3; TTfD HR 0.82; 95% CI 0.69-0.97) and EQ-5D VAS (TTcD HR 1.1; 95% CI 0.87-1.3; TTfD HR 0.98; 95% CI 0.83-1.2). TTfD was not different between treatment arms (HR 1.1; 95% CI 0.95-1.3) for the FKSI-DRS, but TTcD favored sunitinib (HR 1.4; 95% CI 1.1-1.7). Patients were assessed during the off-treatment period for sunitinib, which may have underestimated the negative impact of sunitinib on HRQoL. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, patient-reported outcome scales showed that results between the pembrolizumab + axitinib and sunitinib arms were not different, with the exception of TTcD by the FKSI-DRS. PATIENT SUMMARY: Compared with sunitinib, pembrolizumab + axitinib delays disease progression and extends survival, while HRQoL outcomes were not different between groups.
Assuntos
Carcinoma de Células Renais , Neoplasias Renais , Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efeitos adversos , Axitinibe/efeitos adversos , Carcinoma de Células Renais/patologia , Humanos , Neoplasias Renais/patologia , Qualidade de Vida , SunitinibeRESUMO
Circular RNAs (circRNAs), a recently discovered non-coding RNA, have a number of functions including the regulation of miRNA expression. They have been detected in a number of malignancies including prostate cancer (PCa). The differential expression pattern of circRNAs associated with PCa and androgen receptor (AR) status was investigated in this study. circRNA profiling was performed using a high throughout microarray assay on a panel of prostate cell lines, which consisted of normal, benign, and malignant cells (n = 9). circRNAs were more commonly significantly up-regulated (p < 0.05) than downregulated in malignant cell lines (n = 3,409) vs. benign cell lines (n = 2,949). In a grouped analysis based on AR status, there were 2,127 down-regulated circRNAs in androgen independent cell lines compared to 2,236 in androgen dependent cell lines, thus identifying a potential circRNA signature reflective of androgen dependency. Through a bioinformatics approach, the parental genes associated with the top 10 differentially expressed circRNAs were identified such as hsa_circ_0064644, whose predicted parental gene target is RBMS3, and hsa_circ_0060539, whose predicted gene target is SDC4. Furthermore, we identified three circRNAs associated with the parental gene Caprin1 (hsa_circ_0021652, hsa_circ_0000288, and hsa_circ_0021647). Other studies have shown the importance of Caprin1 in PCa cell survival and drug resistance. Given the modified circRNA expression signatures identified here, these hypothesis generating results suggest that circRNAs may serve as potential putative diagnostic and predictive markers in PCa. However, further validation studies are required to assess the true potential of these markers in the clinical setting.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Radium-223 and enzalutamide are approved agents for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Combining radium-223 and enzalutamide to improve outcomes is of clinical interest due to their differing modes of action and non-overlapping toxicity profiles. METHODS: This phase II study enrolled patients with mCRPC and bone metastases. Patients received six cycles of radium-223 in combination with enzalutamide, followed by enzalutamide alone. The primary endpoint was safety for the combination; secondary endpoints included radiographic/clinical progression-free survival (PFS), PSA PFS, overall survival (OS), change in alkaline phosphatase, patient-reported pain outcomes and skeletal related events. RESULTS: Forty-five patients received the combination treatment: 42 patients (93.3%) received all six cycles. Fourteen patients (31.1%) developed grade 3 or 4 toxicities, most commonly fatigue and neutropaenia. Fractures during the combination period occurred in four patients (8.9%). A further 13 patients (28.9%) developed fractures after completing combination treatment, giving a total of 17 patients (37.8%) who developed a fracture at any time on study. The median time to fracture was greater than 17.2 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 17.2-not estimable]. The median time to PSA progression was 18.1 months (95% CI, 12.68-22.60) and the median time to radiological/clinical progression was 28.0 months (95% CI, 22.54-not reached). At the primary analysis, 19 (42.2%) out of 45 patients had died with a median OS not reached (mean 34.8 months, standard error 1.4). CONCLUSION: In men with progressive mCRPC and bone metastases, the combination of radium-223 and enzalutamide was tolerable with the majority of patients completing the combination treatment. Bone fractures during the combination period were uncommon; however, we did identify a higher incidence of fractures occurring in patients after completing combination treatment. Bone health agents should be administered and bone health should be closely monitored following treatment with radium-223 and enzalutamide.
RESUMO
Most forms of castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) are dependent on the androgen receptor (AR) for survival. While, enzalutamide provides a substantial survival benefit, it is not curative and many patients develop resistance to therapy. Although not yet fully understood, resistance can develop through a number of mechanisms, such as AR copy number gain, the generation of splice variants such as AR-V7 and mutations within the ligand binding domain (LBD) of the AR. circular RNAs (circRNAs) are a novel type of non-coding RNA, which can regulate the function of miRNA, and may play a key role in the development of drug resistance. circRNAs are highly resistant to degradation, are detectable in plasma and, therefore may serve a role as clinical biomarkers. In this study, AR-V7 expression was assessed in an isogenic model of enzalutamide resistance. The model consisted of age matched control cells and two sub-line clones displaying varied resistance to enzalutamide. circRNA profiling was performed on the panel using a high throughout microarray assay. Bioinformatic analysis identified a number of differentially expressed circRNAs and predicted five miRNA binding sites for each circRNA. miRNAs were stratified based on known associations with prostate cancer, and targets were validated using qPCR. Overall, circRNAs were more often down regulated in resistant cell lines compared with control (588 vs. 278). Of particular interest was hsa_circ_0004870, which was down-regulated in enzalutamide resistant cells (p ≤ 0.05, vs. sensitive cells), decreased in cells that highly express AR (p ≤ 0.01, vs. AR negative), and decreased in malignant cells (p ≤ 0.01, vs. benign). The associated parental gene was identified as RBM39, a member of the U2AF65 family of proteins. Both genes were down-regulated in resistant cells (p < 0.05, vs. sensitive cells). This is one of the first studies to profile and demonstrate discrete circRNA expression patterns in an enzalutamide resistant cell line model of prostate cancer. Our data suggests that hsa_circ_0004870, through RBM39, may play a critical role in the development of enzalutamide resistance in CRPC.
Assuntos
Antineoplásicos/uso terapêutico , Feniltioidantoína/análogos & derivados , Neoplasias da Próstata/metabolismo , RNA Circular/metabolismo , Benzamidas , Linhagem Celular Tumoral , Resistencia a Medicamentos Antineoplásicos , Regulação Neoplásica da Expressão Gênica , Genes Neoplásicos , Humanos , Hibridização In Situ , Masculino , Nitrilas , Análise de Sequência com Séries de Oligonucleotídeos , Feniltioidantoína/uso terapêutico , Neoplasias da Próstata/tratamento farmacológicoRESUMO
Circular RNAs (circRNAs) are currently classed as non-coding RNA (ncRNA) that, unlike linear RNAs, form covalently closed continuous loops and act as gene regulators in mammals. They were originally thought to represent errors in splicing and considered to be of low abundance, however, there is now an increased appreciation of their important function in gene regulation. circRNAs are differentially generated by backsplicing of exons or from lariat introns. Unlike linear RNA, the 3' and 5' ends normally present in an RNA molecule have been joined together by covalent bonds leading to circularization. Interestingly, they have been found to be abundant, evolutionally conserved and relatively stable in the cytoplasm. These features confer numerous potential functions to circRNAs, such as acting as miRNA sponges, or binding to RNA-associated proteins to form RNA-protein complexes that regulate gene transcription. It has been proposed that circRNA regulate gene expression at the transcriptional or post-transcriptional level by interacting with miRNAs and that circRNAs may have a role in regulating miRNA function in cancer initiation and progression. circRNAs appear to be more often downregulated in tumor tissue compared to normal tissue and this may be due to (i) errors in the back-splice machinery in malignant tissues, (ii) degradation of circRNAs by deregulated miRNAs in tumor tissue, or (iii) increasing cell proliferation leading to a reduction of circRNAs. circRNAs have been identified in exosomes and more recently, chromosomal translocations in cancer have been shown to generate aberrant fusion-circRNAs associated with resistance to drug treatments. In addition, though originally thought to be non-coding, there is now increasing evidence to suggest that select circRNAs can be translated into functional proteins. Although much remains to be elucidated about circRNA biology and mechanisms of gene regulation, these ncRNAs are quickly emerging as potential disease biomarkers and therapeutic targets in cancer.