Discontinued Treatment For Toxicity Research Articles

LTBK-04. LATE BREAKING ABSTRACT: MEK162 (binimetinib) in children with progressive or recurrent low-grade glioma: a multi-institutional phase II and target validation study

BACKGROUNDRAS/RAF/MEK/ERK pathway activation is the primary driver for most pediatric low-grade gliomas (pLGG). MEK162 (binimetinib) is an orally bioavailable MEK1/2 inhibitor with superior brain penetration in a preclinical model. The primary objective of this multi-institutional phase II and target validation study was to assess stratum-specific efficacy of binimetinib in progressive pLGG.METHODSEligible children aged 1-18 years with previously treated radiographically progressive pLGG were enrolled and treated with binimetinib, starting dose 32mg/m2/dose twice daily. Stratum 1 included patients with pLGG with documented BRAF fusion; stratum 2, neurofibromatosis 1 (NF1)-associated pLGG; stratum 3, sporadic pLGG without documented BRAF fusion; and stratum 4, patients undergoing planned tumor biopsy who began binimetinib preoperatively. Partial and minor responses (PR and MR) were defined as ≥50% and ≥25% decrease in maximal two-dimensional measurements.RESULTSOf 86 patients enrolled, 85 were evaluable for response. Of these, 48 (56%) showed a radiographic response (30 PR and 18 MR) in the first year of treatment. Response rate for stratum 1 (n=28) was 50% (12 PR and 2 MR); 12 (43%) had stable disease (SD) and 2 (7%) progressive disease (PD). Stratum 2 (n=21) response rate was 43% (5 PR, 4 MR), with 12 (57%) SD and no PD. Stratum 3 (n=29) response rate was 69% (10 PR, 10 MR), 4 (14%) SD and 5 (17%) PD. Stratum 4 (n=7) include 3 PR, 2 MR, 2 SD. Nineteen (22%) discontinued treatment for toxicity (most commonly dermatologic), and an additional 42 (49%) required dose reduction. Median dose at the time of PR/MR was 28mg/m2; responses were seen at doses as low 16mg/m2.CONCLUSIONBinimetinib is highly effective in the treatment of both NF1-associated and sporadic pLGG, with or without documented BRAF fusion. Modified dosing strategies to improve tolerability may be considered in future trials.

Molecular profile to guide personalized medicine in adult patients with primary brain tumors: results from the ProfiLER trial.

Immunohistochemistry and recent molecular technologies progressively guided access to personalized anti-tumoral therapies. We explored the feasibility, efficacy, and the impact of molecular profiling in patients with advanced brain tumors. This multicentric prospective trial ProfiLER enrolled patients with primary brain tumors, who have been pre-treated with at least one line of anti-cancer treatment, and for whom molecular profiles had been achieved using next-generation sequencing and/or comparative genomic hybridization on fresh or archived samples from tumor, relapse, or biopsies. A molecular tumor board weekly analyzed results and proposed molecular-based recommended therapy (MBRT). From February 2013 to December 2015, we enrolled 141 patients with primary brain tumor and analyzed 105 patients for whom tumor genomic profiles had been achieved. Histology mainly identified glioblastoma (N = 46, 44%), low-grade glioma (N = 26, 25%), high-grade glioma (N = 12, 11%), and atypical and anaplastic meningioma (N = 8, 8%). Forty-three (41%) patients presented at least one actionable molecular alteration. Out of 61 alterations identified, the most frequent alterations occurred in CDKN2A (N = 18), EGFR (N = 12), PDGFRa (N = 8), PTEN (N = 8), CDK4 (N = 7), KIT (N = 6), PIK3CA (N = 5), and MDM2 (N = 3). Sixteen (15%) patients could not be proposed for a MBRT due to early death (N = 5), lack of available clinical trials (N = 9), or inappropriate results (N = 2). Only six (6%) of the 27 (26%) patients for whom a MBRT had been proposed finally initiated MBRT (everolimus (N = 3), erlotinib (N = 1), ruxolitinib (N = 1), and sorafenib (N = 1)), but discontinued treatment for toxicity (N = 4) or clinical progression (N = 2). High-throughput sequencing in patients with brain tumors may be routinely performed, especially when macroscopic surgery samples are available; nevertheless delays should be reduced. Criteria for clinical trial enrollment should be reconsidered in patients with brain tumors, and a panel of genes specifically dedicated to neurologic tumors should be developed to help decision-making in clinical practice.

Renal function, body surface area, and age are associated with risk of early-onset fluoropyrimidine-associated toxicity in patients treated with capecitabine-based anticancer regimens in daily clinical care

BackgroundThe objective of this analysis was to determine the factors associated with early onset treatment-related toxicity in patients treated with capecitabine-based anticancer regimens in daily clinical care. Patients and MethodsA total of 1463 patients previously included in a prospective cohort study and treated with standard-of-care capecitabine-based anticancer regimens (monotherapy or combined with other chemotherapy or radiotherapy) were analysed. Logistic regression models were developed to investigate associations between patient- and treatment-related factors and occurrence of early – i.e. cycle one or two – severe (grade ≥ 3) treatment-related toxicity, toxicity-related hospitalisation, and toxicity-related treatment discontinuation. Performance of models was evaluated using receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves and internal validity was explored using bootstrap analysis. ResultsAmong 1463 patients included, 231 patients (16%) experienced early severe toxicity, 132 patients (9%) were hospitalised for toxicity, and 146 patients (10%) discontinued treatment for toxicity; in total, 321 patients (22%) experienced any early toxicity-related adverse outcome. Predictors of early grade ≥3 toxicity, after adjustment for treatment regimen, were renal function (odds ratio [OR] 0.85 per 10 ml/min/1.73 m2, p = 0.0007), body surface area (BSA) (OR 0.33 per m2, p = 0.0053), age (OR 1.14 per decade, p = 0.0891), and elevated pre-treatment uracil concentrations (OR 2.41 per 10 ng/ml, p = 0.0046). Age was significantly associated with fatal treatment-related toxicity (OR 5.75, p = 0.0008). Area under the ROC curve (AUC) of a model to predict early grade ≥3 toxicity was 0.704 (95% confidence interval 0.666–0.743, optimism-corrected AUC 0.690). ConclusionRenal function, BSA, and age, in addition to pre-treatment uracil, are associated with clinically relevant differences in risk of early severe toxicity in patients treated with capecitabine in routine clinical care.

Autologous Transplantation Versus Cyclophosphamide-Lenalidomide-Prednisone Followed By Lenalidomide-Prednisone Versus Lenalidomide Maintenance in Multiple Myeloma: Long-Term Results of a Phase III Trial

▪Introduction. High-dose melphalan plus autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT) is the standard approach in newly diagnosed, transplant-eligible myeloma patients. We compared consolidation with high-dose melphalan plus ASCT versus cyclophosphamide-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (CRD), and maintenance with lenalidomide-prednisone (RP) versus lenalidomide alone (R).Methods. This is an open-label, randomized, phase 3 study. We enrolled newly diagnosed, transplant-eligible myeloma patients aged ≤65 years. Using a 2-by-2 factorial design, we randomized patients to consolidation with melphalan 200 mg/m2 (MEL200) followed by ASCT or CRD (cyclophosphamide 300 mg/m2 days 1, 8, 15; dexamethasone 40 mg days 1, 8, 15, 22; lenalidomide 25 mg days 1-21); and to maintenance with RP (lenalidomide 10 mg days 1-21; prednisone 50 mg every other day) or R alone. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS).Results. 389 patients were enrolled between July 6, 2009 and May 6, 2011. Median follow-up was 54.5 months. MEL200 significantly increased PFS (median PFS from the start of consolidation: 43.3 versus 28.6 months; HR 0.40, P<0.001) and overall survival (OS; 4-year: 86% versus 73%; HR 0.42, P=0.004) compared with CRD. Median PFS from the start of maintenance was 37.5 months with RP versus 28.5 months with R maintenance (HR 0.84, P=0.336); 3-year OS was 83% with RP versus 88% with R maintenance (HR 1.53, P=0.210). Grade 3-4 hematologic toxicities (84% versus 26%, P<0.001), gastrointestinal toxicities (20% versus 5%, P<0.001) and infections (19% versus 6%, P=0.002) were higher with MEL200 than with CRD. No significant difference in adverse events (AEs) between RP and R was noticed. The most frequent grade 3-4 hematologic AEs were neutropenia (8% with RP versus 13% with R; P=0.193), infections (8% with RP versus 5% with R; P=0.417), systemic AEs (6% vs 2%; P=0.174) and vascular AEs (4% with RP versus 2% with R; P=0.449). In the RP arm, lenalidomide dose-reduction for AEs was required in 9% of patients; prednisone dose-reduction was required in 36% of patients (median time to prednisone dose-reduction: 4 months); 5% discontinued treatment for toxicity and 3% stopped treatment after developing a second primary malignancy (SPM). In the R arm, lenalidomide dose-reduction was required in 21% of patients; 8% discontinued lenalidomide for toxicity; 2% stopped treatment after developing a SPM. The median duration of lenalidomide treatment was comparable in the 2 groups.Conclusions. MEL200 significantly prolonged PFS and OS compared with CRD, regardless of maintenance. RP maintenance did not significantly improve PFS and OS compared with R alone. DisclosuresGay:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Off Label Use: Use off-label of drugs for the dose and/or schedule and/or association. Petrucci:Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria. Di Raimondo:Janssen-Cilag, Celgene: Honoraria. Caravita:Celgene: Honoraria. Ria:Italfarmaco: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Offidani:Janssen-Cilag, Celgene, Sanofi, Amgen, Mundipharma: Honoraria. Bringhen:Merck Sharp & Dohme: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen-Cilag, Celgene, Novartis: Honoraria; Onyx: Consultancy. Patriarca:Janssen-Cilag, Celgene, Merck Sharp & Dohme: Honoraria. Spencer:Celgene: Honoraria. Hajek:Merck Sharp & Dohme: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Boccadoro:Sanofi: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Palumbo:Novartis, Sanofi Aventis: Honoraria; Celgene, Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Genmab, Janssen-Cilag, Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria.

Vandetanib for the treatment of advanced medullary thyroid cancer outside a clinical trial: results from a French cohort.

A randomized phase III trial demonstrated that vandetanib treatment is effective in patients with metastatic medullary thyroid cancer (MTC), leading to regulatory approval, but its use may be associated with toxicities that require specific monitoring and management. The objective of the present study performed in France was to describe the toxicity profile and efficacy of vandetanib treatment when given outside any trial. Sixty-eight patients were treated with vandetanib in the frame of a temporary use authorization (ATU) in France from August 2010 to February 2012, when the drug was available on request for patients with locally advanced or metastatic MTC. Patients were registered by the French health authorities, and characteristics, treatment parameters, toxicity profile, and efficacy were retrospectively reviewed. Eight patients were excluded from the analysis because vandetanib treatment was not administered (n=3), had been given in a trial before ATU (n=3), or was given for a non-MTC cancer (n=2). Data from the 60 MTC patients were analyzed. Mean age was 58 years (range 11-83 years), 39 patients were male, and six had hereditary MTC. Fifty-six (93%) had metastatic disease in the mediastinum (82%), bones (65%), liver (53%), or lung (53%), and four had only locally advanced disease. At the time of study evaluation, with a median follow-up of 20 months and a median duration of treatment of 9.7 months (range 0.3-36 months), 15 patients were continuing vandetanib treatment (range 18-36 months). Median progression-free survival was 16.1 months. Twenty-five patients discontinued treatment for disease progression (range 0.3-29 months). Best tumor response was a complete response in one patient, a partial response in 12 (20%), stable disease in 33 (55%), and progression in seven patients (12%). All patients had at least one adverse event (AE) during treatment. The main AEs were skin toxicity, diarrhea, and asthenia. Sixteen patients (27%) discontinued treatment for toxicity, and one patient died from vandetanib-induced cardiac toxicity. Vandetanib is an effective option for patients with advanced MTC. AEs should be monitored carefully and should be minimized by educating both patients and care providers and by applying symptomatic treatment and dose reduction.

Pomalidomide, cyclophosphamide, and prednisone for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: a multicenter phase 1/2 open-label study

AbstractWe performed a phase 1/2 trial to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of pomalidomide and to explore its efficacy when combined with cyclophosphamide-prednisone in relapsed/refractory myeloma patients. Pomalidomide was given at 1 to 2.5 mg/d, cyclophosphamide at 50 mg every other day, prednisone at 50 mg every other day, for 6 28-day cycles, followed by pomalidomide-prednisone maintenance therapy. Thromboprophylaxis was recommended. Sixty-nine patients were enrolled, 55 received the MTD (2.5 mg/d) and were evaluated. Best responses included complete response in 3 patients (5%), very good partial response in 10 (18%), partial response in 15 (27%), minimal response in 11 (20%), stable disease in 15 (27%), and progressive disease in 1 (3%), for an overall response rate of 51%. The median time-to-response was 1.83 months. After a median follow-up of 14.8 months, median progression-free survival was 10.4 months and 1-year overall survival was 69%. At the MTD, grade 3 to 4 toxicities included anemia (9%), thrombocytopenia (11%), neutropenia (42%), neurologic events (7%), dermatologic events (7%), and thromboembolism (2%). Grade 3 to 5 infections occurred in 5 patients (9%). Five patients (9%) discontinued treatment for toxicity. New grade 3 to 4 adverse events were low during maintenance. Pomalidomide-cyclophosphamide-prednisone is safe and effective in relapsed/refractory myeloma patients. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01166113.

A phase II trial of dasatinib in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer treated previously with chemotherapy

There is a need for efficacious therapies for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) after disease progression on docetaxel. The SRC tyrosine kinase and its related family members may be important drivers of prostate cancer and can be inhibited by dasatinib. mCRPC patients, after one previous chemotherapy, started dasatinib at 70 mg twice daily, amended to 100 mg daily. The primary endpoint was the disease control (DC) rate, defined as complete response (CR), partial response (PR), or stable disease (SD) in prostate specific antigen (PSA), RECIST, bone scan, and FACT-P score. Up to 41 patients were to be accrued (two-stage design, 21+20) to rule out a null-hypothesized effect of 5 versus 20% (α=0.05, β=0.1). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival, toxicity, and pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic correlatives. Of 38 patients, 27 were evaluable for response or toxicity. The median duration of therapy was 55 days (6-284). Five patients showed DC after 8 weeks of therapy (18.5% DC, 95% CI: 6.3-38.1%). One PR (3.7% response rate, 95% CI: 0.1-19.0%) was observed in a patient treated for 284 days. Twelve patients (43%) discontinued treatment for toxicity. Dasatinib induced a decrease in phytohemagglutinin-stimulated CSF2, CD40L, GZMB, and IL-2 mRNAs in blood cells, indicating target engagement. Decreases in plasma IL-6 and bone alkaline phosphatase, and in urinary N-telopeptide, were associated with DC. Dasatinib has definite but limited activity in advanced mCRPC, and was poorly tolerated. The observation of a patient with prolonged, objective, clinically significant benefit warrants molecular profiling to select the appropriate patient population.

Final report of an open-label phase II trial of bevacizumab plus docetaxel and gemcitabine in metastatic, previously untreated nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

e18046 Background: Platinum and non-platinum doublet chemotherapy has similar efficacy in advanced NSCLC patients (pts). Bevacizumab (B) improves outcomes when added to platinum doublets, but its safety and efficacy in combination with non-platinum doublets is unknown. This study was designed to test the combination of B, docetaxel (D), and gemcitabine (G) in first-line treatment of advanced NSCLC. Methods: Pts with metastatic, non-squamous NSCLC, PS 0-1, and measurable disease by RECIST were enrolled in this open-label, single arm phase II trial. Pts received D (75 mg/m2) on d1, G (900 mg/m2) on d1 &amp; 8, and B (15 mg/kg) on d1 every 21d for up to 6 cycles, followed by B maintenance until progression or 12 mos total. Pts received growth factor d9. CT scans were performed every 6 wks. The primary endpoint was 1-yr progression-free survival (PFS), with secondary endpoints of safety, objective response rate (ORR), overall PFS, and overall survival (OS). Pts with tumor cavitation, untreated brain metastases, and hemoptysis were excluded. Planned enrollment was 46. Results: 13 pts were enrolled from 12/2009 to 4/2011. Pt characteristics: Median age 63 (35-69), 85% male, PS 0 (38%), PS 1 (62%). The median # of cycles of chemotherapy was 6 (1-6), median # cycles of B was 4 (1-15), with 2 pts coming off study prior to the first evaluation (1 grade 5 encephalopathy, 1 grade 4 febrile neutropenia). 5 pts (38%) had chemo dose reduction and 4 (31%) discontinued treatment for toxicity. 3 pts (23%) discontinued B prior to progression, 2 for tumor cavitation and 1 for grade 1 hemoptysis. The grade 3-5 non-hematologic toxicity rate was 69%, with 6 pts (46%) hospitalized with pneumonitis/pneumonia felt possibly related to study drugs. At this point enrollment was halted for safety concerns. The 1-yr PFS was 8%, and the median PFS was 6.9 mos (95% CI 2.0-NYR). 11 pts were evaluable for response, and 6 pts had partial responses for an ORR of 55%. The median OS was NYR with median follow up of 10.9 mos. Conclusions: The combination of B, D, and G was not tolerable at the doses and schedule used in this study. A formal phase I trial is needed if this combination is to be investigated further.

Gemcitabine/platinum alone or in combination with cetuximab as first-line treatment for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)

7539 Background: This randomized phase II study was conducted to evaluate the benefit of adding cetuximab, an IgG1 monoclonal antibody targeting the EGF receptor, to gemcitabine/platinum chemotherapy in patients with recurrent or metastatic NSCLC. Methods: Patients with previously untreated stage IIIB (malignant pleural effusion) or stage IV NSCLC irrespective of their EGF receptor status were eligible for this study. Patients on arm A received cetuximab (400 mg/m2 IV on day 1 followed by 250 mg/m2 weekly) combined with either cisplatin (75 mg/m2 IV q3 weeks) and gemcitabine (1,250 mg/m2 IV days 1 and 8) or carboplatin (AUC 5 IV q3 weeks) and gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m2 IV days 1 and 8). Patients on Arm B received the same chemotherapy regimen without cetuximab. The primary endpoint was tumor response rate with progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) as secondary endpoints. Results: 73 women and 58 men, median age 66 years (35–88) were randomized to arm A (n=65) or arm B (n=66). Partial responses occurred in 18 (27.7%, 95% CI: 17.3–40.2) patients in arm A and 12 (18.2%, 95% CI 9.8–29.6) in arm B. Median PFS was 5.09 months for arm A (95% CI: 4.17–5.98) and 4.21 months (95% CI: 3.81–5.49) in arm B; median OS was 11.99 (95% CI: 8.80–15.20) and 9.26 months (95% CI: 7.43–11.79) respectively. The incidence of drug related infusion reactions (any grade) in arm A was 15.6% and 1.5% in arm B. Three patients in arm A had grade 3–4 cetuximab related infusion reactions. Severe acneform rash was observed in 14.1% of patients in arm A and none in arm B. Other toxicities were similar and only 18.5% of patients in arm A and 10.6% patients in arm B discontinued treatment for toxicity. Conclusions: These data confirm the previously observed benefit for the combination of cetuximab with a platinum based doublet chemotherapy regimen patients with metastatic NSCLC. The difference of 2.7 months in median OS between treatment arms seems to suggest a more substantial clinical benefit. Fully powered phase III studies addressing this question are on- going and results will become available in 2007. [Table: see text]