Capecitabine In Patients Research Articles

Efficacy and Safety of Trastuzumab Emtansine Plus Capecitabine vs Trastuzumab Emtansine Alone in Patients With Previously Treated ERBB2 (HER2)-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer

ERBB2 (HER2)-targeted therapy provides benefits in metastatic breast cancer (mBC) and gastric cancer, but additional treatments are needed to maximize efficacy and quality of life. To determine maximum tolerated doses (MTDs) of trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) plus capecitabine in patients with previously treated ERBB2-positive mBC and locally advanced/metastatic gastric cancer (LA/mGC) (phase 1) and the efficacy and safety of this combination vs T-DM1 alone in patients with mBC (phase 2). The MTD in phase 1 was assessed using a 3 + 3 design with capecitabine dose modification. Phase 2 was an open-label, randomized, international multicenter study of patients with mBC treated with T-DM1 plus capecitabine or T-DM1 alone. Eligible patients had previously treated ERBB2-positive mBC or LA/mGC with no prior chemotherapy treatment for advanced disease. Patients in the phase 1 mBC cohort received capecitabine (750 mg/m2, 700 mg/m2, or 650 mg/m2 twice daily, days 1-14 of a 3-week cycle) plus T-DM1 3.6 mg/kg every 3 weeks. Patients with LA/mGC received capecitabine at the mBC phase 1 MTD, de-escalating as needed, plus T-DM1 2.4 mg/kg weekly. In phase 2, patients with mBC were randomized (1:1) to receive capecitabine (at the phase 1 MTD) plus T-DM1 or T-DM1 alone. The phase 1 primary objective was to identify the MTD of capecitabine plus T-DM1. The phase 2 primary outcome was investigator-assessed overall response rate (ORR). In phase 1, the median (range) age was 54.0 (37-71) and 57.5 (53-70) years for patients with mBC and patients with LA/mGC, respectively. The capecitabine MTD was identified as 700 mg/m2 in 11 patients with mBC and 6 patients with LA/mGC evaluable for dose-limiting toxic effects. In phase 2, between October 2014 and April 2016, patients with mBC (median [range] age, 52.0 [28-80] years) were randomized to receive combination therapy (n = 81) or T-DM1 (n = 80). The ORR was 44% (36 of 81 patients) and 36% (29 of 80 patients) in the combination and T-DM1 groups, respectively (difference, 8.2%; 90% CI, -4.5 to 20.9; P = .34; clinical cutoff, May 31, 2017). Adverse events (AEs) were reported in 78 of 82 patients (95%) in the combination group, with 36 (44%) experiencing grade 3-4 AEs, and 69 of 78 patients (88%) in the T-DM1 group, with 32 (41%) experiencing grade 3-4 AEs. No grade 5 AEs were reported. Adding capecitabine to T-DM1 did not statistically increase ORR associated with T-DM1 in patients with previously treated ERBB2-positive mBC. The combination group reported more AEs, but with no unexpected toxic effects. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01702558.

Irinotecan with or without capecitabine as a beyond 2nd line regime for esophago-gastric adenocarcinomas.

e16545 Background: Purpose: The aim of this retrospective study was to assess the efficacy and toxicity of irinotecan +/- capecitabine for patients with metastatic esophago-gastric (EG) adenocarcinomas previously treated with at least two chemotherapy regimens including platinum-based, fluoropyramidines and taxanes. Introduction: Treatment for metastatic EG cancer beyond 2nd line remains controversial. Recently, the TAGS phase III trial (Shitara et al., 2018) showed overall survival benefit with Trifluridine/tipiracil of 2.1 months compared to placebo as a third line. Apatinib is also approved for use as third line in China (Li et al., 2013). Based on minimal evidence (Kang et al., 2013), irinotecan in combination with capecitabine is used in the UK. We performed a retrospective study to assess the efficacy and toxicity of irinotecan as a beyond 2nd line regime in metastatic EG adenocarcinomas in one of Europe’s largest cancer centres, The Christie. Methods: Data was collected retrospectively from all metastatic EG adenocarcinoma patients who were treated with irinotecan +/- capecitabine as a beyond 2nd line palliative treatment at the Christie Hospital from January 2014 to December 2019. Irinotecan was either given 2 or 3 weekly at dose of 180 mg/m² with or without capecitabine 800 mg/m². Response rate (RR) was calculated according to RECIST version 1.1, overall survival measured and toxicity data collected. Results: Fifty-six patients received irinotecan as beyond 2nd line palliative chemotherapy. Out of the thirty-seven patients with measurable disease on their scans, the overall response rate was 8.1% and the disease control rate was 51.4% as per RECIST 1.1. Median overall survival was 5 months (95% CI 4.2-5.8). The presence of grade 3-4 toxicities was 16% (9 patients) and included neutropenia, fatigue, nausea and diarrhea. On average, 3.7 cycles were administered, 32% (18 patients) required dose reductions, mainly secondary to grade 2 diarrhea and fatigue. Conclusions: Irinotecan in combination with capecitabine is efficacious as a beyond 2nd line regime in metastatic EG with an acceptable toxicity profile with a limited role in patients with resistant disease to first line platinum-based chemotherapies with fluoropyramidines.

Tucatinib versus placebo added to trastuzumab and capecitabine for patients with previously treated HER2+ metastatic breast cancer with brain metastases (HER2CLIMB).

1005 Background: Tucatinib (TUC) is an investigational, highly selective HER2 kinase inhibitor. HER2CLIMB (NCT02614794) showed clinically meaningful and statistically significant improvements in overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS) in all pts, prolongation of PFS in pts with brain metastases (BM), and objective response rate (ORR) when TUC was added to trastuzumab (T) and capecitabine (C). Primary methods and outcomes have been reported previously (Murthy NEJM 2019). We report the results of exploratory efficacy analyses in pts with BM. Methods: All pts with HER2+ metastatic breast cancer (MBC) enrolled in HER2CLIMB had a baseline brain MRI. Pts with BM were eligible and classified as untreated, treated stable, or treated and progressing. Pts were randomized 2:1 to receive TUC or placebo, in combination with T and C. Efficacy analyses in pts with BM at baseline were performed by applying RECIST 1.1 to the brain based on investigator evaluation. CNS-PFS (progression in the brain or death) and OS were evaluated in BM pts overall. Intracranial (IC) confirmed ORR (ORR-IC) and IC duration of response (DOR-IC) were evaluated in BM pts with measurable IC disease. After isolated brain progression, pts could continue study therapy after local treatment until second progression, and time from randomization to second progression or death was evaluated. Results: Overall, 291 pts (48%) had BM at baseline: 198 (48%) in the TUC arm and 93 (46%) in the control arm. There was a 68% reduction in risk of CNS-PFS in the TUC arm (HR: 0.32; 95% CI: 0.22, 0.48; P < 0.0001). Median CNS-PFS was 9.9 mo in the TUC arm vs 4.2 mo in the control arm. Risk of death overall was reduced by 42% in the TUC arm (OS HR: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.40, 0.85; P = 0.005). Median OS was 18.1 mo vs 12.0 mo. ORR-IC was higher in the TUC arm (47.3%; 95% CI: 33.7, 61.2) vs the control arm (20.0%; 95% CI: 5.7, 43.7). Median DOR-IC was 6.8 mo (95% CI: 5.5, 16.4) vs 3.0 mo (95% CI: 3.0, 10.3). In pts with isolated brain progression who continued study therapy after local treatment (n = 30), risk of second progression or death was reduced by 67% (HR: 0.33; 95% CI: 0.11, 1.02), and median PFS from randomization was 15.9 mo vs 9.7 mo, favoring the TUC arm. Conclusions: In pts with heavily previously treated HER2+ MBC with BM, TUC in combination with T and C doubled the ORR-IC, reduced risk of IC progression or death by two thirds and reduced risk of death by nearly half. If approved, TUC in combination with T and C has the potential to become a new standard of care in pts with HER2+ MBC with and without BM. Clinical trial information: NCT02614794 .

Management of adverse events in patients with HER2+ metastatic breast cancer treated with tucatinib, trastuzumab, and capecitabine (HER2CLIMB).

1043 Background: Tucatinib (TUC) is an investigational TKI, highly selective for HER2 without significant inhibition of EGFR. HER2CLIMB is a randomized trial of TUC vs placebo in combination with trastuzumab and capecitabine in patients (pts) with HER2+ breast cancer (NCT02614794, Murthy NEJM 2019). The most common G ≥3 adverse events (AEs) with higher incidence on the TUC arm (diarrhea, palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome [PPE], and elevated liver enzymes) are described herein. Methods: Given that pts on the TUC arm had a longer duration of tx than those on the control arm, time-at-risk exposure-adjusted incidence rates of diarrhea, AST, ALT, and PPE were calculated as the number of pts with an event divided by the total exposure time-at-risk of an initial occurrence of the event among pts in the tx group. Time-to-event analyses were conducted for AST/ALT/bilirubin (in aggregate), diarrhea, and PPE. Results: Diarrhea and elevated AST/ALT/bilirubin on both the TUC and control arms were primarily G1/2 and manageable with dose modifications, and in some cases of diarrhea, with antidiarrheal tx. Median time to diarrhea onset was shorter on the TUC arm compared to control. For AST/ALT/bilirubin and PPE, median time to first onset was Cycles 1 and 2. On the TUC arm, antidiarrheals were used in 49.7% of cycles in which diarrhea was reported (39.8% on the control arm), and when used, the median duration of use on each arm was 3 days per cycle. Prophylactic antidiarrheals were not required per protocol. When adjusted for exposure (time-at-risk exposure-adjusted incidence rate per 100 person-years), the difference in G ≥3 events between tx arms becomes similar for diarrhea and PPE (21 vs 17 and 21 vs 19). The difference in G ≥3 events between arms is reduced for AST and ALT (7 vs 1 and 8 vs 1). Conclusions: TUC with trastuzumab and capecitabine was well-tolerated. Rates of G ≥3 diarrhea and PPE were similar between tx arms. Elevated liver enzymes were higher on the TUC arm, but were transient and reversible. Discontinuation of TUC due to AEs was rare. Clinical trial information: NCT02614794 . [Table: see text]

Randomized, phase II trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab plus capecitabine adjuvant therapy compared to capecitabine monotherapy for triple receptor-negative breast cancer (TNBC) with residual invasive cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (MIRINAE trial, KCSG-BR18-21).

TPS597 Background: Triple negative breast cancer (TNBC), lack of ER, PR and HER2 expression, is known to have aggressive clinical features such as early recurrence, drug resistance, and frequent distant metastasis at the diagnosis. The most effective chemotherapy combinations used for early TNBC include anthracycline, taxanes, and/or platinum agents. Achieving a pathologic complete response (pCR) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) provides important prognostic information and is considered as a surrogate endpoint in many clinical trials especially with TNBC. Patients with residual invasive disease after NAC have a high risk for early relapse and worse prognosis compared to those with pCR. Therefore, patients who did not get pCR could be better candidates for additional adjuvant treatment because their risk of recurrence would be higher than those with pCR. The CREATE-X (capecitabine for residual cancer as adjuvant therapy) trial howed that adjuvant capecitabine treatment improved 5-yr rate of disease free survival in TNBC subtype. A recent study indicated that immunosuppressive microenvironment had developed even in early stage of TNBC with increased T cells with a high exhaustion signature which are targets of immune modulating agents. Therefore, earlier cooperation of immune modulating drugs would be beneficial by generating a long-lasting anti-tumor immune response to micrometastatic disease, thus preventing disease relapse or recurrence. Methods: This study is a phase II, multicenter, randomized open label trial of atezolizumab (anti-PD-L1 antibody) and capecitabine compared with capecitabine in patients with TNBC who had residual disease after NAC. 284 patients will be enrolled from 15 sites in Korea with a primary objective to access the 5-yr invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) rate. Secondary objectives include 5-yr IDFS rate in PD-L1 positive population, distant relapse free survival (DRFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. Major inclusion and exclusion criteria are followings; 1) histologically confirmed TNBC, 2) received anthracycline and taxane based NAC followed by complete breast surgery, 3) residual disease after NAC must be ≥1cm in the greatest dimension, and/or have macroscopically positive lymph nodes. The study is open with 13 patients enrolled at the time of submission. Clinical trial information: NCT03756298 .

Impact of absolute lymphocyte count on the efficacy of eribulin and capecitabine in patients with metastatic breast cancer.

e13082 Background: In a phase 3 trial (Study 301), which compared eribulin and capecitabine for metastatic breast cancer did not show the superiority of one to the other on overall survival. Recently, a post-hoc analysis has revealed that efficacy of eribulin was greater in patients with high levels of absolute lymphocyte count (ALC), probably because the drug has immunologic mechanisms of action. Here we investigated whether the favorable impact of high ALC levels on the efficacy was specific to eribulin or shared with capecitabine. Methods: A total of 275 patients with metastatic breast cancer who were treated with eribulin (n = 125) or capecitabine (n = 150) in our hospital between July 2011–April 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. Progression-free survival (PFS) was compared between patients with higher ALC levels (≥1500/μL) and those with lower ALC levels ( < 1500/μL) in each treatment group. Then, we investigated how hazard ratio (HR) of PFS (eribulin vs. capecitabine) changed when we excluded patients with low ALC levels one by one; a scatter plot was made (X = cut-off value of ALC, Y = adjusted HR). PFS was compared by using the Cox proportional hazards model and covariates included age, hormonal and HER2 status, presence/absence of liver and other visceral metastasis, the number of involved organs and the number of previous chemotherapy regimens. Results: In eribulin group, PFS was significantly better in patients with higher ALC than those with lower ALC (adjusted HR, 0.50 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.29–0.85]; p = .010). Contrarily, in capecitabine group, PFS was not significantly different between the two groups (adjusted HR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.58–1.28], p = .456). According to the scatter plot, as the cut-off value of ALC (X) was increased, the hazard ratio of PFS (Y) changed biphasically, being almost flat when X was less than 1500, and a linear decrease when X was 1500 or more. Adjusted HR were (i) 1.07 [95% CI, 0.64–1.82], (ii) 0.79 [95% CI, 0.29–2.11] and (iii) 0.67 [95% CI, 0.18–2.41] when inclusion criteria of patients were (i) ALC ≥1500/μL, (ii) ALC ≥1900/μL and (iii) ALC ≥2200/μL, respectively. Conclusions: The efficacy of eribulin was significantly better in patients with higher ALC levels, whereas that of capecitabine was not significantly different. “The more, the better” relationship between ALC and the efficacy of eribulin (vs. capecitabine) was recognized when ALC was 1500/μL or more.

Oral Capecitabine-Vinorelbine is Associated with Longer Overall Survival When Compared to Single-Agent Capecitabine in Patients with Hormone Receptor-Positive Advanced Breast Cancer.

Background: Single-agent capecitabine (C) is a moderately effective chemotherapeutic compound in the treatment of patients with HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer (mBC). The capecitabine-vinorelbine (CV) combination is also used due to a good tolerability profile, but no studies have demonstrated its superiority over single-agent C. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis to compare overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and incidence of adverse events (AEs) in patients with HER2-negative mBC treated with CV vs. single-agent C. Results: Out of 290 patients included in this study, 127 (43.8%) received single-agent C, while 163 (56.2%) patients were treated with CV. Median PFS was similar in patients treated with single-agent C or CV, while CV was associated with significantly longer OS in patients with hormone receptor-positive (HR+) BC. This OS advantage was confirmed at multivariable analysis also after propensity score-based matching of patients according to relevant clinical or tumor characteristics. When compared with single-agent C, CV was associated with higher incidence of G3/G4 and any-grade nausea/vomiting, diarrhea and increased transaminases. Conclusions: While prospective studies are needed to confirm our findings, the potential OS advantage of CV over single-agent C in HR+ mBC patients must be weighed against a significantly higher incidence of AEs.

PD-1 Antibody (SHR-1210) Plus Apatinib and Capecitabine in Patients With Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma After Surgery

PD-1 Antibody (SHR-1210) Plus Apatinib and Capecitabine in Patients With Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma After Surgery

Abstract OT1-08-07: CONTESSA 2: A multinational, multicenter, phase 2 study of tesetaxel plus a reduced dose of capecitabine in patients with HER2-, HR+ metastatic breast cancer (MBC) who have not previously received a taxane

Abstract Background: Chemotherapy treatments with robust efficacy that preserve quality of life are needed. Tesetaxel is a novel, oral taxane that has potential advantages over currently available taxanes, including: oral administration with a low pill burden and once every 3 week (Q3W) dosing; no observed hypersensitivity reactions; preclinical evidence of central nervous system (CNS) penetration; and improved activity against chemotherapy-resistant tumors. More than 600 patients have been treated with tesetaxel in clinical studies. Tesetaxel had robust monotherapy activity in a Phase 2 study in 38 patients with HER2-, HR+ MBC, with a confirmed objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST 1.1 of 45%. Preclinical and clinical studies suggest that reducing the dose of capecitabine in combination with a taxane may result in reduced toxicity without a reduction in efficacy. CONTESSA 2 investigates tesetaxel plus a reduced dose of capecitabine as an all-oral regimen in taxane-naïve patients with HER2-, HR+ MBC. Trial design: CONTESSA 2 is a 125-patient, multinational, multicenter, single-arm, Phase 2 study of tesetaxel (27 mg/m2 on Day 1 of a 21-day cycle) plus a reduced dose of capecitabine (1,650 mg/m2/day for 14 days of each 21-day cycle) in patients with HER2-, HR+ MBC who have received no more than one chemotherapy regimen for advanced disease and have not previously been treated with a taxane in any setting. Patients with CNS metastases are eligible. The primary endpoint is confirmed ORR assessed by an Independent Radiologic Review Committee (IRC). A sample size of 125 will allow the ORR to be estimated with a maximum standard error of < 5%. Secondary endpoints include duration of response, pharmacokinetics (PK) of tesetaxel and potential for a PK interaction between tesetaxel and capecitabine. Enrollment was initiated in January 2019. For further information on this trial, email joconnell@odonate.com or visit clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03858972). Citation Format: Lee Schwartzberg, Jamil Asselah, Igor Bondarenko, YeeSoo Chae, Noshir DaCosta, Yin-Hsun Feng, Yann Izarzugaza, Julie Lemieux, Mei-Ching Liu, Gavin Marx, Joyce O'Shaughnessy, Mafalda Oliveira, Hope Rugo, Andrew Seidman, Gail Wright, Joseph O'Connell, Thomas Wei, Sung-Bae Kim. CONTESSA 2: A multinational, multicenter, phase 2 study of tesetaxel plus a reduced dose of capecitabine in patients with HER2-, HR+ metastatic breast cancer (MBC) who have not previously received a taxane [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2019 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2019 Dec 10-14; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(4 Suppl):Abstract nr OT1-08-07.

Abstract OT1-08-09: CONTESSA: A multinational, multicenter, randomized, phase 3 registration study of tesetaxel plus a reduced dose of capecitabine in patients with HER2-, hormone receptor + (HR+) metastatic breast cancer (MBC) who have previously received a taxane

Abstract Background: Chemotherapy treatments with robust efficacy that preserve quality of life are needed. Tesetaxel is a novel, oral taxane that has potential advantages over currently available taxanes, including: oral administration with a low pill burden and once every 3 week (Q3W) dosing; no observed hypersensitivity reactions; preclinical evidence of central nervous system (CNS) penetration; and improved activity against chemotherapy-resistant tumors. More than 600 patients have been treated with tesetaxel in clinical studies. Tesetaxel had robust monotherapy activity in a Phase 2 study in 38 patients with HER2-, HR+ MBC, with a confirmed objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST 1.1 of 45% and median PFS of 5.4 months. The confirmed ORR in taxane-pretreated patients also was 45%. Preclinical and clinical studies suggest that reducing the dose of capecitabine in combination with a taxane may result in reduced toxicity without a reduction in efficacy. CONTESSA investigates tesetaxel plus a reduced dose of capecitabine as an all-oral regimen in patients with HER2-, HR+ MBC. Trial design: CONTESSA is a 600-patient, multinational, multicenter, randomized (1:1), Phase 3 registration study comparing tesetaxel (27 mg/m2 on Day 1 of a 21-day cycle) plus a reduced dose of capecitabine (1,650 mg/m2/day on Days 1-14 of a 21-day cycle) to the approved dose of capecitabine alone (2,500 mg/m2/day on Days 1-14 of a 21-day cycle) in patients with HER2-, HR+ MBC who have received no more than one chemotherapy regimen for advanced disease and have received a taxane in the (neo)adjuvant setting. Patients with known CNS metastases are eligible. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival (PFS) assessed by an Independent Radiologic Review Committee (IRC). CONTESSA is 90% powered to detect a 42% improvement in PFS (HR = 0.71). Secondary endpoints are overall survival, ORR and disease control rate. Enrollment began in December 2017. In June 2019, the Independent Data Monitoring Committee for CONTESSA recommended that the study continue with no modifications following a planned interim efficacy futility analysis. The interim efficacy futility analysis was based on a pre-specified analysis of the first approximate 100 PFS events that occurred in the study. For further information on this trial, email joconnell@odonate.com or visit clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03326674). Citation Format: Joyce O'Shaughnessy, Martine Piccart, Lee Schwartzberg, Javier Cortes, Nadia Harbeck, Seock-Ah Im, Hope Rugo, Michael Untch, Denise Yardley, Igor Bondarenko, Veronique Dieras, Mark Pegram, Stew Kroll, Joseph O'Connell, Jeff Vacirca, Thomas Wei, Kevin Tang, Andrew Seidman. CONTESSA: A multinational, multicenter, randomized, phase 3 registration study of tesetaxel plus a reduced dose of capecitabine in patients with HER2-, hormone receptor + (HR+) metastatic breast cancer (MBC) who have previously received a taxane [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2019 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2019 Dec 10-14; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(4 Suppl):Abstract nr OT1-08-09.

Phase Ib/II study combining tosedostat with capecitabine in patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is an aggressive malignancy with limited therapeutic options. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the aminopeptidase inhibitor tosedostat with capecitabine in advanced PDAC. We conducted a phase Ib/II trial of tosedostat with capecitabine as second-line therapy for advanced PDAC. Planned enrollment was 36 patients. Eligible patients were treated with capecitabine 1,000 mg/m2 oral twice-daily days 1-14 and oral tosedostat in a dose de-escalation design on days 1-21 of each 21-day cycle. Primary endpoints were the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) and progression-free survival (PFS). Sixteen patients were enrolled. Tosedostat 120 mg oral twice daily with capecitabine 1,000 mg/m2 oral twice daily was the RP2D. There was one dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) (grade 3 acute coronary syndrome) during phase Ib. The most common treatment-related adverse events were gastrointestinal (nausea, diarrhea), cardiac [QTc prolongation, decreased ejection fraction (EF)], and fatigue. The median PFS was 7.1 months, and the median treatment failure free survival was 3 months. Eight patients experienced stable disease for greater than 3 months. The study was closed early due to lack of drug availability. Tosedostat with capecitabine displayed tolerable toxicity, and prolonged disease control in a subset of patients. These data encourage further exploration of aminopeptidase inhibitors in pancreatic cancer.

Incidence and risk markers of 5-fluorouracil and capecitabine cardiotoxicity in patients with colorectal cancer

Background: Fluoropyrimidines are mainstay chemotherapeutics in the treatment of gastrointestinal cancers and are also used to treat breast cancer and head and neck cancers. However, 5-flourouracil (5-FU) and capecitabine may induce cardiotoxicity that mostly presents as acute coronary syndromes. We compared the incidence of cardiotoxicity induced by 5-FU and capecitabine in patients with colorectal cancer and sought to identify risk markers for cardiotoxicity.Methods: We reviewed all consecutive patients with colorectal cancer who received 5-FU or capecitabine at one institution in the neoadjuvant (2007–2016), adjuvant (2000–2016) or metastatic setting (2007–2016).Results: Totally, 995 patients received 5-FU and 1241 received capecitabine. The incidence of cardiotoxicity induced by 5-FU was 5.2% [95% confidence interval (CI): 3.8–6.6%] and 4.1% (95% CI: 3.0–5.2%) induced by capecitabine (p = .21). The most common events were angina without ischemia (5-FU: 1.6%, capecitabine: 1.3%, p = .53), angina with ischemia on ECG (5-FU: 0.9%, capecitabine: 0.8%, p = .53), unspecified chest pain (5-FU: 0.9%, capecitabine: 0.6%, p = .34), ST-elevation myocardial infarction (5-FU: 0.5%; capecitabine: 0.4%, p = .76) and non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (5-FU: 0.7%, capecitabine: 0.5%, p = .50). Cardiac arrest or sudden death occurred in 0.5 and 0.4%, respectively (p = 1). No risk markers for cardiotoxicity induced by 5-FU were identified. In the capecitabine group, ischemic heart disease was a risk marker (odds ratio: 2.9, 95% CI: 1.2–7.0, p = .016).Conclusions: Five percent of patients treated with 5-FU developed cardiotoxicity and 4% treated with capecitabine. Ischemic heart disease was a risk marker for cardiotoxicity induced by capecitabine.

Phase II study of gemcitabine, oxaliplatin and capecitabine in patients with KRAS exon 2 mutated biliary tract cancers

Background: Molecular markers may identify subgroups of patients with clinically distinct behavior and response to treatment. In some gastrointestinal tumors, KRAS has prognostic value and negative predictive value. This is the first prospective study to report the outcome of combination chemotherapy in biliary tract cancer patients with KRAS mutation.Methods: From 2009 to 2015, 25 patients were included from two Scandinavian centers. Main inclusion criteria were non-resectable biliary tract cancer, ECOG performance status 0–2 and tumor KRAS mutation. A bi-weekly cycle of chemotherapy was administered as gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 and oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2 day 1, followed by 7 days of oral capecitabine 1000 mg/m2. Response evaluation was done every six treatment and the primary endpoint was the fraction with progression free survival (PFS) at 6 months. The study also included a non-preplanned analysis of circulating tumor specific DNA.Results: Chemotherapy was given for a median of 5 months (range 0–14) and among 17 patients evaluable for response, best responses were complete response (1), partial response (2), and stable disease (14). Eighteen patients had CT-verified progression, six died between evaluations and one patient is still progression-free. Median PFS was 6.8 months (95% CI 3.1–11.0) and median overall survival (OS) was 11.2 months (95% CI 6.6–14.3). The fraction with PFS at 6 months was 52% (95% CI 31–69%). Exploratory analyses found an improved survival in patients with a low level of plasma DNA.Conclusion: Pretreatment molecular characterization was feasible in BTC, but the rate of KRAS mutations was low. The study met its primary endpoint with a fraction of PFS at six months of 52%. The effect of combination chemotherapy with gemcitabine, oxaliplatin and capecitabine in this selected population was comparable to results from unselected groups with PFS and OS of 6.8 and 11.2 months, respectively. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00779454

89P - A phase II trial of adjuvant chemoradiotherapy for patients with high-risk rectal submucosal invasive cancer after local resection

BackgroundSurgery is recommended for patients with high-risk submucosal invasive rectal cancer (SM-RC) after local resection. However, surgery affect patient’s quality of life due to stoma placement and impaired anal function. Thus, alternative treatments to prevent local metastasis are anticipated. This study assessed the safety of adjuvant chemoradiotherapy with capecitabine for patients with high-risk SM-RC after local resection. MethodsThis single-arm, multicenter, phase II trial enrolled patients with high-risk SM-RC who underwent local resection within 12 weeks prior to enrollment. High-risk SM-RC was defined as the presence of at least one of the following factors: poor differentiation of adenocarcinoma, ≥ 1mm of submucosal invasion, presence of lymphovascular invasion, and grade 2 or 3 of tumor budding. Protocol treatment included 45.0 Gy radiotherapy with conventional fractionation and 825 mg/m2 capecitabine administered twice daily until the completion of radiotherapy. The primary endpoint was treatment completion rate, with an expected rate of 95% and a threshold of 80%. This study was registered with the University Hospital Medical Information Network, number UMIN000016785. ResultsA total of 29 patients from six institutions were enrolled between May 2015 and February 2018. One patient was ineligible. Twenty-three patients completed treatment with a completion rate of 82% (80% confidence interval; range, 69%–91%). The remaining five patients also completed treatment with protocol deviation from the planned treatment schedule. The mean relative dose intensity of capecitabine was 89% (range, 58%–100%). The most common adverse events were radiation dermatitis (54%), anal pain (39%), and anal mucositis (29%). No grade 3 or higher adverse events were reported. ConclusionsAdjuvant chemoradiotherapy using capecitabine demonstrated manageable safety in patients with high-risk SM-RC after local resection. Clinical trial identificationUMIN000016785. Legal entity responsible for the studyThe authors. FundingThe National Cancer Center Research and Development Fund (25‐A‐12) to Dr Saito. DisclosureAll authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Effect of omeprazole on plasma concentration and adverse reactions of capecitabine in patients with colon cancer

Objective: To investigate the effect of omeprazole on plasma concentration, efficacy and adverse reactions of capecitabine in patients with colon cancer. Methods: Seventy-two patients with colon cancer treated with capecitabine were analysed retrospective. The patients treated with capecitabine combined with omeprazole were identified as experimental group and the capecitabine treatment alone as control group.The differences of blood concentration and the side effects of capecitabine between these two groups were compared. Results: The plasma concentration of 5-Fluorouracilum in experimental group was (126.25±50.59) μg/ml, without significant difference of (123.09±56.70) μg/ml in control group (P=0.121). The incidence of Ⅲ to Ⅳ degree bone marrow suppression, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea and hand-foot syndrome in experimental group were 13.8%, 0%, 0% and 19.4%, respectively. In control group, the incidence of Ⅲ to Ⅳ degree bone marrow suppression, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea and the hand-foot syndrome were 11.1%, 0%, 0% and 19.4%, respectively, without significant difference of experimental group (P>0.05). The incidence of acid reflux and heartburn in the control group was 72.2%, significantly higher than 44.4% of the experimental group (P<0.05). The objective response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival time (PFS) in these two groups were 30.6% and 33.3%, and 8.0 month and 8.5 month, respectively, without significant difference (P>0.05). Conclusion: The intravenous omeprazole attenuates reflux and heartburn of colon cancer patients treated with capecitabine, without affecting its plasma concentration and side effects and has no impact on the PFS of these patients.

Comparison of efficacy and safety of S-1 and capecitabine in patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background:This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of S-1 and capecitabine in patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma (mCRC).Methods:Eligible prospective clinical trials were searched and available data were extracted. Odds ratio and hazard ratio of available outcomes including objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and adverse events (AEs) were pooled for analysis.Results:A total of 6 studies including 828 patients were included. The results of pooled analysis showed no statistical difference in short-term efficacy including ORR (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.68–1.19; P = .48) or DCR (95% CI: 0.65–1.29; P = .61), or long-term efficacy including PFS (95% CI: 0.75–1.08; P = .26) or OS (95% CI: 0.78–1.13; P = .50). Symptoms of diarrhea at any grade were more prevalent (95% CI: 1.21–2.29; P = .002) in patients treated with S-1, while hand-foot syndrome (HFS) at any grade (95% CI: 0.24–0.48; P < .0001) or high grade (95% CI: 0.09–0.48; P < .0001) was more frequent in capecitabine group. AEs including leucopenia, neutropenia, anemia, thrombocytopenia, vomiting, oral mucositis, stomatitis, elevated alanine transaminase, or peripheral neuropathy showed no statistical difference between S-1 and capecitabine group (all P > .05).Conclusions:This meta-analysis reveals that S-1 has comparable efficacy, lower risk of HFS and higher incidence of diarrhea compared to capecitabine for treatment in patients with mCRC.

Neratinib + capecitabine versus lapatinib + capecitabine in patients with HER2+ metastatic breast cancer previously treated with ≥ 2 HER2-directed regimens: Findings from the multinational, randomized, phase III NALA trial.

1002 Background: NALA (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01808573) is a multinational, randomized, open-label, phase III trial of neratinib (an irreversible pan-HER tyrosine kinase inhibitor [TKI]) + capecitabine (N+C) vs lapatinib (a reversible dual TKI) + capecitabine (L+C) in patients with stage IV HER2+ metastatic breast cancer (MBC) who had received ≥2 prior HER2-directed regimens for MBC. Methods: Patients were randomized 1:1 to N (240 mg qd po) + C (750 mg/m2 bid po) or L (1250 mg qd po) + C (1000 mg/m2 bid po). Co-primary endpoints were centrally assessed progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints were investigator-assessed PFS; objective response rate (ORR); duration of response (DoR); clinical benefit rate (CBR); time to intervention for symptomatic metastatic central nervous system (CNS) disease; safety; and patient-reported health outcomes. Results: 621 patients were randomized (307 to N+C; 314 to L+C). The risk of disease progression or death was reduced by 24% with N+C vs L+C (HR = 0.76; 95% CI 0.63–0.93; p = 0.006); 6- and 12-month PFS rates were 47.2% vs 37.8% and 28.8% vs 14.8% for N+C vs L+C, respectively. OS rates at 6 and 12 months were 90.2% vs 87.5% and 72.5% vs 66.7% for N+C vs L+C, respectively (HR = 0.88; 95% CI 0.72–1.07; p = 0.2086). ORR in patients with measurable disease at screening was improved with N+C vs L+C (32.8% vs 26.7%; p = 0.1201), as was CBR (44.5% vs 35.6%; p = 0.0328) and DoR (HR = 0.50; 95% CI 0.33–0.74; p = 0.0004). Time to intervention for symptomatic CNS disease (overall cumulative incidence 22.8% vs 29.2%; p = 0.043) was delayed with N+C vs L+C. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were similar between arms, but there was a higher rate of grade 3 diarrhea with N+C vs L+C (24.4% vs 12.5%). TEAEs leading to neratinib/lapatinib discontinuation were lower with neratinib (10.9%) than with lapatinib (14.5%). Conclusions: N+C significantly improved PFS with a trend towards improved OS vs L+C. N+C also resulted in a delayed time to intervention for symptomatic CNS disease. Tolerability was similar between the two arms, with no new safety signals observed. Clinical trial information: NCT01808573.

Safety, efficacy, and biomarker analysis of pyrotinib in combination with capecitabine in HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer patients: A phase I clinical trial.

1035 Background: Cross-signaling in the ErbB family is an important mechanism in Trastuzumab resistance. Pyrotinib is an irreversible pan-ErbB inhibitor targeting EGFR/HER1, HER2 and HER4, which may offer the potential for improved efficacy to block HER2 signaling in trastuzumab-resistant breast cancer. This phase I study assessed the safety, tolerability, maximum-tolerated dose (MTD), pharmacokinetics, antitumor activity and predictive biomarkers of pyrotinib in combination with capecitabine in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Methods: Patients received oral pyrotinib 160 mg, 240 mg, 320 mg, or 400 mg once daily continually plus capecitabine 1000mg/m2 twice daily on days 1 to 14 of a 21-day cycle. Pharmacokinetic blood samples were collected predose on day 1 and day 14 of treatment. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) was performed on circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) to probe for predictive biomarkers of this combination. Results: A total of 28 patients were enrolled. All 28 (100%) patients experienced at least one treatment-related Adverse Events (AE), which were predominantly grade 1 or 2. Grade 3 treatment-related AE occurred in 12 (42.9%) patients; anemia (14.3%) and diarrhea (10.7%) were the most common grade 3 AEs. Three (10.7%) patients discontinued capecitabine administration due to AEs. The overall response rate (ORR) was 78.6% (95% CI: 59.0% to 91.7%), and the disease control rate (complete response+ partial response+ stable disease) was 96.4% (95% CI: 81.7% to 99.9%). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 22.1 months (95% CI: 9.0 to 26.2 months). ORR was 70.6% (12/17) in trastuzumab-pretreated patients and 90.9% (10/11) in trastuzumab-naive patients. NGS analysis of all genetic alterations of HER2 bypass signaling pathway, PI3K/Akt/mTOR pathway and TP53 in baseline blood samples suggested that concomitant (two or more) genetic alterations were significantly associated with poorer PFS compared to none or one genetic alteration (median, 15.8 vs. 26.2 months, p = 0.006). Conclusions: Pyrotinib in combination with capecitabine are well-tolerated and demonstrate promising antitumor activity in HER2-positive MBC patients. Clinical trial information: NCT02361112.

A randomized phase II study of palbociclib plus exemestane with GNRH agonist versus capecitabine in premenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer (KCSG-BR 15-10, NCT02592746).

1007 Background: Endocrine treatment is preferred recommendation by clinical guidelines in premenopausal as well as postmenopausal women with hormone receptor(HR)-positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer(MBC). In real-world clinical practice, however, substantial numbers of patients are treated with chemotherapy in earlier lines based on endocrine resistance and/or on physician’s concern of worse prognosis associated with aggressive tumor behavior and younger age. In terms of the chemotherapy regimens, capecitabine seems one of the most popular options. The purpose of this phase II study is to assess the safety and the clinical anti-tumor activity of exemestane plus GNRH agonist in combination with palbociclib versus capecitabine in premenopausal HR-positive MBC patients. Methods: This is a prospective, two-arm, randomized, multi-center open-label phase II study of the Korean Cancer Study Group. Patients were allowed with previous 1 line of chemotherapy for MBC. De Novo metastatic patients should have been treated with tamoxifen before enrollment. Patients were randomized to chemotherapy (capecitabine 1250 ㎎/㎡twice a day from day 1 to 14 every 3 weeks) or endocrine therapy combination (exemestane 25 mg for 28 days and palbociclib 125 mg for 21 days every 4 weeks with GNRH agoinst). Primary endpoint was Progression-Free Survival (PFS). Results: Among 189 patients enrolled between 2016 and 2018 from 14 centers, 184 patients were randomly assigned to chemotherapy (n = 92) or endocrine therapy with palbociclib (n = 92). Median age was 44 (range 28-58). De Novo MBC was found equally in both arm (30%). During median 14 months of follow-up, median PFS was superior in endocrine with palbociclib than in capecitabine arm [19.0 vs. 11.3 months, p = 0.0493 by log-rank test; Hazard Ratio (HR) 0.643 (0.415-0.999), p = 0.0493]. Approximately half of the patients (51%) were treatment naïve in the advanced setting (49% for palbociclib vs. 51% for capecitabine). Grade III or more hematologic toxicities were more common in palbociclib than in capecitabine with statistical significance (60.9% vs. 19.2%, p &lt; 0.0001). Diarrhea (11% vs. 38%) and Hand-Foot syndromes (1% vs. 76%) were more common in capecitabine arm. Conclusions: Exemestane plus palbociclib with ovarian suppression showed clinical benefit in terms of PFS compared with capecitabine in patients with premenopausal ER-positive MBC. Clinical trial information: NCT02592746.

A phase ib trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of quinacrine plus capecitabine in patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer.

e15020 Background: Acridines emerged from a cell-based screen for p53-pathway restoring compounds. Quinacrine, an acridine demonstrating p53 pathway restoration properties, displayed preclinical anti-tumor effects when used as monotherapy in colorectal cancer (CRC) cell culture and in vivo xenografts. Quinacrine suppresses survival pathways by inhibiting Mcl-1 expression, NFkB, STAT3, and angiogenesis. The combination of quinacrine plus 5-FU showed in-vivo preclinical efficacy against CRC with mutant KRAS, BRAF, or p53. Capecitabine, an oral 5-FU prodrug, is FDA-approved to treat metastatic (m)CRC. This phase I trial evaluated the safety and efficacy of quinacrine plus capecitabine in patients with refractory mCRC. Methods: Patients ≥18 years old with histologically confirmed mCRC refractory to standard therapy or with no standard therapy options available were eligible for the study. Using a modified 4B Simon’s accelerated titration design, patients were treated with a fixed dose of capecitabine 1000 mg/m2 twice daily (bid) for 14 days of a 21-day cycle, and escalating doses of quinacrine 100 mg daily, 100 mg bid, and 200 mg bid for 21 days. The primary endpoint was to identify the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of quinacrine in combination with capecitabine and to determine their tolerability and safety. Results: Ten patients were enrolled, median age 60-years old (range: 56-79). Quinacrine 100 mg daily and 100 mg bid were well tolerated by the first two patients. Dose Limiting Toxicities (DLTs) were seen in 3 patients treated with quinacrine 200 mg bid and included hyperbilirubinemia, transaminitis, increased alkaline phosphatase, hypokalemia, diarrhea, vomiting, and dehydration. No grade 4 or 5 toxicities were seen. 5 additional patients tolerated treatment with quinacrine 100 mg bid and capecitabine without further DLTs making this the MTD. The median time on treatment was 63 days. Three patients came off study prior to their first response evaluation. In 7 patients evaluable for response, 4 had stable disease (57%), while 3 (43%) had disease progression. Median overall survival was 196.5 days. Conclusions: Capecitabine and quinacrine can be safely administered at the MTD of capecitabine 1000 mg/m2 PO bid D1-14 and quinacrine 100 mg PO bid D1-21 of a 21-day cycle for patients with mCRC. A phase II study is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT01844076.