Exploratory randomized trial to evaluate the effect of indisetron tablets for preventing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV)/acute-onset diarrhea induced by IRIS/FOLFIRI: HGCSG0704

624

Background: Indisetron is a 5-HT3 receptor antagonist that also antagonizes 5-HT4receptors. Indisetron tablets showed the non-inferiority to ondansetron tablets in terms of efficacy for preventing CINV. Moreover, preclinical data administered with irinotecan showed indisetron significantly reduced stool frequency in mice and inhibited the colonic peristalsis in dogs. We designed a pilot study compared with granisetron in the efficacy and tolerability of indisetron for irinotecan-induced nausea, vomiting and especially in diarrhea. Methods: Advanced colorectal cancer patients treated with FOLFIRI or IRIS (Irinotecan + S-1) with or without bevacizumab were enrolled in this study. Treatment: Arm A: indisetron tablets 8mg po day1. Arm B: granisetron 3mg iv day 1. The primary endpoints were the incidence of acute-onset diarrhea and complete protection from vomiting. Secondary endpoints were tolerability, complete protection from nausea and rate of no rescue medication. Results: Between May 2008 and July 2012, 33 patients (pts) were randomized. The study was closed prematurely due to poor accrual. Arm A: 16 pts, arm B 17 pts. Median age A: 68 y.o., B: 66 y.o.: ECOG PS 0/1: A: 12/4, B: 14/3pts. There was no significant difference of the incidence of acute-onset diarrhea between both groups (18.8% in A vs. 35.3% in B, p = 0.438). The proportion of complete protection from vomiting was 87.5% in A and 88.2% in B (p = 1.000). Similarly, complete protection from nausea, rate of no rescue medication, proportion of patients with a complete response (defined as no emetic episodes and no rescue medication) did not have a significant difference. Severity of nausea/vomiting and AE induced by 5-HT3 receptor antagonist were also similar between two groups. Conclusions: Compared with granisetron, indisetron showed effective and feasible results for preventing CINV induced by FOLFIRI or IRIS. Indisetron had also not improved the incidence of acute-onset diarrhea induced by irinotecan. Clinical trial information: UMIN000010162.

Multi-center randomized controlled study to establish the standard third-line regimen for Helicobacter pylori eradication in Japan

BACKGROUNDS

The present study sought to establish a standard third-line eradication regimen for Helicobacter pylori in Japan.

METHODS

Subjects were 204 patients with H. pylori infection in whom the standard Japanese first- and second-line eradication therapies had proven unsuccessful. Patients were randomly assigned to one of the following third-line eradication therapy groups: (1) LA group: lansoprazole (LPZ) 30 mg 4 times a day (qid) + amoxicillin (AMPC) 500 mg qid for two weeks; (2) LAL group: LPZ 30 mg twice a day (bid) + AMPC 750 mg bid + levofloxacin (LVFX) 300 mg bid for one week; (3) LAS group: LPZ 30 mg bid + AMPC 750 mg bid + sitafloxacin (STFX) 100 mg bid for one week. Patients for whom these therapies failed underwent a crossover fourth-line eradication regimen. Drug sensitivity was also tested for AMPC, clarithromycin (CAM), MNZ, LVFX, and STFX.

RESULTS

Drug resistance rates prior to third-line eradication therapy were 86.4 % for CAM, 71.3 % for MNZ, 57.0 % for LVFX, 8.2 % for AMPC, and 7.7 % for STFX. Intention-to-treat analysis of third-line eradication therapy eradication rates showed a significantly higher rate in the LAS group (70.0 %) compared with the LA group (54.3 %; p < 0.05) and the LAL group (43.1 %; p < 0.001). The significantly lower rate in the LAL group than the LAS group was caused by bacterial resistance to LVFX.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings suggest that triple therapy with PPI, AMPC, and STFX for one week would be an effective standard third-line eradication regimen for H. pylori in Japan.

Effect of hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy of 5-fluorouracil and cisplatin for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in the Nationwide Survey of Primary Liver Cancer in Japan

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy for the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains unclear.

METHODS

The outcome of 476 patients with HCC who underwent hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy with 5-fluorouracil and cisplatin (HAIC) were compared with 1466 patients who did not receive active therapy.

RESULTS

A survival benefit of the therapy after adjusting for known risk factors was observed (hazard ratio, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.41-0.56; P<0.0001). In propensity score-matched analysis (n=682), median survival time was longer for patients who underwent chemotherapy (14.0 months) than for patients who did not receive active treatment (5.2 months, P<0.0001).

CONCLUSION

For advanced HCC, HAIC is considered to be an effective treatment.

The efficacy of first-line IRIS with or without bevacizumab in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: Analysis of two phase II studies

e14604

Background: The safety and efficacy of first-line IRIS (S-1 in combination with irinotecan; Komatsu Y, et al. Oncology, 2011) and IRIS/Bev (IRIS in combination with bevacizumab (Bev); Komatsu Y, et al. Acta Oncol, 2012/Yuki S, et al. 2013 ASCO-GI) have been evaluated in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). This time, no randomized studies comparing these regimens have been performed. This retrospective analysis compared efficacy and safety data for the two regimens from separate phase II studies performed at Hokkaido Gastrointestinal Cancer Study Group (HGCSG). Methods: Patients with histologically confirmed unresectable metastatic or recurrent CRC and received no prior chemotherapy were enrolled. In the first trial, patients received irinotecan 100 mg/m2 on day 1,15 and oral S-1 40 mg/m2 twice daily on days 1-14 every 4 weeks (IRIS study: HGCSG0302). In the second trial, patients received the same regimen plus Bev 5 mg/kg on day 1,15 (IRIS/Bev study). Results: A total of 40 and 52 patients were enrolled the IRIS and IRIS/Bev studies, respectively. Patient characteristics were generally similar in both groups, whereas there were more cases of good performance status and less number of metastatic organ in IRIS/Bev group. The median overall survival was 39.6 months in IRIS/Bev, as compared with 23.4 months in IRIS, corresponding to a hazard ratio for death of 0.418 (p<0.001). The median progression-free survival was 17.0 months in IRIS/Bev, as compared with 8.6 months in IRIS (hazard ratio for disease progression, 0.418; p<0.001); the corresponding response rate were 63.5 percent and 52.5 percent (p=0.393).In a multivariate analysis of PFS and OS, IRIS/Bev (n=52) was significantly associated with longer PFS and OS compared with IRIS alone (n=40). Conclusions: In this retrospective comparison of two studies, the addition of Bev to IRIS appeared to improve outcome compared with IRIS alone in the first-line treatment of patients with mCRC.

An open, multicenter, phase II clinical trial to evaluate efficacy and safety of S-1 split cisplatin in patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC): HGCSG0702—Safety analysis

121

Background: From the results of SPIRITS trial, S-1 plus cisplatin has been regarded as standard first-line chemotherapy for patients with AGC in Japan. However, many facilities are forced hospitalization of hydration upon administration of high dose Cisplatin (60mg/m2). Therefore, in Hokkaido Gastrointestinal Cancer Study Group (HGCSG), to investigate the safety and efficacy, we conducted a multicenter phase II clinical trials of S-1 plus split cisplatin as a therapeutic strategy that can be administered in the outpatient. Methods: Eligibility criteria included pathologically confirmed AGC; no prior chemotherapy; Age 20 to 75, ECOG performance status (PS) of 0 to 1; adequate organ function; and written informed consent. S-1 (40-60 mg depending on patients body surface area) was given orally, twice daily for 3 consecutive weeks, and 30 mg/m2 cisplatin was given intravenously on day 1 and 15, followed by 2-week rest period, within a 5-week cycle. Primary endpoint was the response rate (RR), and secondary endpoints were progression-free survival, overall survival, safety profile, and duration of hospitalization. Results: Between Mar 2008 and Mar 2012, 40 pts were enrolled. Patients characteristics were as follows: median age 63 years (range 41-75), Male: female 30:10, PS 0:1 33:7. Median no. of cycles was 3. The most common non-hematological adverse events (AE) were anorexia (70%), nausea (60%), fatigue (60%) and diarrhea (48%) and hematological AE were anemia (88%), neutropenia (83%), leukocytopenia (68%) and thrombocytopenia (60%). The main grade 3-4 AE were neutropenia (40%), anemia (30%), anorexia (30%) and fatigue (15%). These AE were as expected. The median dose intensity of S-1 was 270mg/m2/week (relative dose intensity (RDI) 80%), and cisplatin was 10.1mg/m2/week (RDI 84%). These toxicities were tolerable and manageable. No treatment-related death was observed. Conclusions: We conclude that this S-1 plus split cisplatin regimen was well tolerated in the treatment of AGC, and most patients could be administered in the outpatient. We are planning the final efficacy analysis for February 2013.

Guidelines and good clinical practice recommendations for contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in the liver--update 2012: a WFUMB-EFSUMB initiative in cooperation with representatives of AFSUMB, AIUM, ASUM, FLAUS and ICUS

Initially, a set of guidelines for the use of ultrasound contrast agents was published in 2004 dealing only with liver applications. A second edition of the guidelines in 2008 reflected changes in the available contrast agents and updated the guidelines for the liver, as well as implementing some non-liver applications. Time has moved on, and the need for international guidelines on the use of CEUS in the liver has become apparent. The present document describes the third iteration of recommendations for the hepatic use of contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) using contrast specific imaging techniques. This joint WFUMB-EFSUMB initiative has implicated experts from major leading ultrasound societies worldwide. These liver CEUS guidelines are simultaneously published in the official journals of both organizing federations (i.e., Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology for WFUMB and Ultraschall in der Medizin/European Journal of Ultrasound for EFSUMB). These guidelines and recommendations provide general advice on the use of all currently clinically available ultrasound contrast agents (UCA). They are intended to create standard protocols for the use and administration of UCA in liver applications on an international basis and improve the management of patients worldwide.

Phase II trial of combined chemotherapy with irinotecan, S-1, and bevacizumab (IRIS/Bev) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): Hokkaido Gastrointestinal Cancer Study Group (HGCSG) trial—Comparison of the efficacy of KRAS status

536

Background: Mutations of the KRAS gene were identified as a predictive marker in mCRC for anti-EGFR antibody. Previously reported data suggest that the longer overall survival (OS) observed with bevacizumab (BV) treatment in mCRC is independent of alterations in the KRAS status. We analized efficacy of BV combined irinotecan and S-1 (IRIS/Bev) in mCRC relative to KRAS status. Methods: In the retrospective analysis (n=53) of patients who participated in the Phase II trial of IRIS/Bev, additional statistical analyses were done with data from KRAS mutational analyses. In this trial, eligible patients had to have mCRC with a confirmed diagnosis of adenocarcinoma, an age of >20 years, and no history of prior chemotherapy. S-1 40-60 mg twice daily p.o. was given on days 1-14 and irinotecan 100 mg/m2 and bevacizumab 5 mg/kg i.v. were given on days 1 and 15 of a 28-day cycle. The Response Evaluation in Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria version 1.0 was used to assess tumor response. The Kaplan–Meier method was used to determine Progression-free survival (PFS) and OS. Log-rank test was used to compare with mutant or wild-type KRASin terms of PFS and OS. All statistical tests were performed using SPSS. Results: The target number of 53 patients was enrolled as of March 2009. KRAS status was assessed in 43 patients (wild = 27, mutant = 16). Response rate was 63.0% with wild-type and 68.8% with mutant-type KRAS, that was not significant (p=0.752). The median Progression-free survival was 17.1 months with wild-type and 22.7 months with mutant-type KRAS, that was not significant (p=0.531). And median OS was 49.0 months with wild-type and 38.0 months with mutant-type KRAS, that was not significant(p=0.906) as well. Conclusions: IRIS/Bev provides clinical benefit in patients with mCRC expressing either mutant or wild-type KRAS. Randomized control trial comparing this regimen with oxaliplatin containing regimen(XELOX or mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab: TRICOLORE study) is already started. Comparison of the efficacy of KRAS status is also planned in this study. Clinical trial information: NCT00569790.

Optimal dose period for indisetron tablets for preventing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting with modified FOLFOX6: a randomized pilot study

BACKGROUND

Indisetron is a serotonin (5-hydroxytryptamine type 3) receptor antagonist that also antagonizes 5-hydroxytryptamine type 4 receptors. We designed a pilot study in order to explore the optimal dosing period for indisetron during modified FOLFOX6 (mFOLFOX6).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Forty-two chemotherapy-naive patients with advanced colorectal cancer scheduled to receive mFOLFOX6 were randomly assigned to either a 1- or 3-day indisetron regimen arm. The primary endpoint was complete protection from vomiting.

RESULTS

Proportions of patients with complete protection from vomiting were 85.7% [95% confidence interval (CI) 63.7-97.0] with the 3-day regimen and 81.0% (95% CI 58.1-94.6) with the 1-day regimen. Proportions of patients with complete protection from nausea were 47.6% in each arm (95% CI 25.7-70.2). No rescue therapy rates were 66.7% (95% CI 43.0-85.4) versus 57.1% (95% CI 34.0-78.2). No severe adverse events were observed in either arm.

CONCLUSION

Both 1- and 3-day indisetron regimens were feasible for preventing nausea and vomiting induced by mFOLFOX6.

Retrospective cohort study on the safety and efficacy of panitumumab for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: The HGCSG1002 study—Analysis of after cetuximab refractory

541

Background: In the previous studies, panitumumab (Pmab) has been demonstrated the efficacy for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in all treatment lines. It is still controversial about the efficacy of Pmab for patients that had progressed on prior cetuximab (Cmab), though there had been a few reports (from Metges et al. and Wadlow et al.) regarding the efficacy of Pmab after Cmab refractory or intolerance. To evaluate the efficacy and safety of Pmab in patients with cetuximab-refractory mCRC, in comparison with anti-EGFR antibody naïve patients (Cmab-naïve) and Cmab-refractory or intolerance patients (prior-Cmab). Methods: Two hundred patients with mCRC treated by Pmab contained chemotherapy were retrospectively registered from 20 centers in Japan (HGCSG 1002 study). Of these, the patients that were refractory to or intolerant for 5-FU/ irinotecan/ oxaliplatin, and were administered Pmab monotherapy were included in this analysis. Results: Of 93 patients (44 prior-Cmab and 49 Cmab-naïve) were evaluated. There were no significant differences in the baseline characteristics of the patients in each group. The incidence of Grade 3 or higher any skin toxicities were higher in the Cmab-naïve (26.5.%) than in the prior-Cmab (11.4%). The overall response rate (RR) was not significantly difference (prior-Cmab/ Cmab-naïve, 9.1%/ 10.2%), but the disease control rate (DCR) was slightly higher in Cmab-naïve group (38.6%/ 55.1%, p=0.15). Progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were follows: prior-Cmab/ Cmab-naïve, 2.8m/ 3.1m, 6.8m / 9.5m. There was a significant difference between the two groups in OS curve (p=0.04). Conclusions: Pmab was safely administered to heavily pretreated mCRC patients in daily practice. Although there were no significant differences in RR, DCS and PFS between prior-Cmab and Cmab-naïve, but the median OS was longer for the Cmab-naïve group compared with the prior-Cmab group. Therapeutic efficacies of Pmab for prior-Cmab patients did not comparable to those for Cmab-naïve patients. We are now performing a phase II trial on the efficacy of Pmab for Cmab-refractory mCRC patients.

Phase II study of combined chemotherapy with irinotecan and S-1 (IRIS) plus bevacizumab in patients with inoperable recurrent or advanced colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

In Japan, a study comparing the effectiveness and safety of irinotecan plus S-1 (IRIS) with those of a combination of 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) as second-line treatment in patients with advanced or recurrent colorectal cancer demonstrated that IRIS was non-inferior to FOLFIRI. We previously reported that IRIS is also effective as first-line treatment.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eligibility criteria included inoperable recurrent colorectal cancer with a confirmed diagnosis of adenocarcinoma, age ≥20 years, and no history of prior chemotherapy. S-1 (40-60 mg twice daily) was given orally on Days 1 to 14, and irinotecan (100 mg/m(2)) and bevacizumab (5 mg/kg) were given intravenously on Days 1 and 15 of a 28-day cycle. The primary endpoint was safety. The secondary endpoints included overall response (OR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

A total of 52 eligible patients were enrolled from October 2007 through March 2009. In safety analysis, the incidences of grade 3 or 4 adverse reactions were as follows: neutropenia, 27%; hypertension, 21%; and diarrhea, 17%. The overall response rate was 57.7%. Median progression-free survival was 16.7 months.

CONCLUSION

IRIS plus bevacizumab is a well-tolerated, highly effective chemotherapeutic regimen that is easy to administer.

First interim analysis of the GIDEON (Global Investigation of therapeutic decisions in hepatocellular carcinoma and of its treatment with sorafeNib) non-interventional study

AIMS

Global Investigation of therapeutic DEcisions in hepatocellular carcinoma and Of its treatment with sorafeNib (GIDEON), a global, non-interventional, surveillance study, aims to evaluate the safety of sorafenib in all patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC) under real-life practice conditions, particularly Child-Pugh B patients, who were not well represented in clinical trials.

METHODS

Treatment decisions are determined by each physician according to local prescribing guidelines and clinical practice. Patients with uHCC who are candidates for systemic therapy, and for whom a decision has been made to treat with sorafenib, are eligible for inclusion. Demographic data and medical and disease history are recorded at entry. Sorafenib dosing and adverse events (AEs) are collected throughout the study.

RESULTS

From January 2009 to April 2011, >3000 patients from 39 countries were enrolled. The prespecified first interim analysis was conducted when the initial approximately 500 treated patients had been followed up for ≥4 months; 479 were valid for safety evaluation. Preplanned subgroup analyses indicate differences in patient characteristics, disease aetiology and previous treatments by region. Variation in sorafenib dosing by specialty are also observed; Child-Pugh status did not appear to influence the starting dose of sorafenib. The type and incidence of AEs was consistent with findings from previous clinical studies. AE profiles were comparable between Child-Pugh subgroups.

DISCUSSION

The GIDEON study is generating a large, robust database from a broad population of patients with uHCC. First interim analyses have shown global and regional differences in patient characteristics, disease aetiology and practice patterns. Subsequent planned analyses will allow further evaluation of early trends.

Phase II trial of combined chemotherapy with irinotecan, S-1, and bevacizumab (IRIS/Bev) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: Update analysis—Hokkaido Gastrointestinal Cancer Study Group (HGCSG) trial

3593

Background: The FIRIS study (Muro K et al. Lancet Oncol 2010;11:853–860) previously demonstrated the non-inferiority of Irinotecan plus S-1(IRIS) to FOLFIRI for metastatic colorectal cancer(mCRC), with progression-free survival (PFS) as the primary endpoint. We previously reported that IRIS plus bevacizumab(IRIS/bev) is very effective as first-line treatment (Komatsu Y et al. ESMO 2010). We now report the updated results of this study. Methods: Eligible patients had to have mCRC with a confirmed diagnosis of adenocarcinoma, an age of >20 years, ECOG performance status (PS) of 0-1, and no history of prior chemotherapy. S-1 40-60 mg twice daily p.o. was given on days 1-14 and irinotecan 100 mg/m2 and bevacizumab 5 mg/kg i.v. were given on days 1 and 15 of a 28-day cycle. The primary endpoint was safety. The secondary endpoints included overall response (OR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Results: The target number of 53 patients was enrolled as of March 2009. The results are reported for 52 patients with evaluable lesions. The clinical characteristics of the patients were as follows. The median age was 63.5 years (range, 48 to 82). The male:female ratio was 3:2. The performance status on the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group scale was 0. In January 2012, on safety analysis, the incidence of grade 3 or 4 neutropenia was 27%. The incidences of other grade 3 or 4 adverse reactions were as follows: diarrhea, 17%; anorexia, 4%; stomatitis, 2%; hypertension, 21%; and gastrointestinal perforation, 0%. The overall response rate was 63.5%. Three patients had complete response. Thirty patients had partial response, 16 had stable disease, none had progressive disease, and 3 were not evaluable. Median progression-free survival was 17.0 months and median survival time was 39.6 months. Conclusions: IRIS/Bev is a remarkably active and generally well-tolerated first-line treatment for patients with mCRC. Randomized control trial comparing this regimen with oxaliplatin containing regimen(XELOX or mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab) is being planned.

Activation of JNK and high expression level of CD133 predict a poor response to sorafenib in hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) ranks as the third leading cause of cancer deaths worldwide. While sorafenib, a multikinase inhibitor targeting the Raf/extracellular signal-regulated protein kinase (ERK) pathway, has been shown recently to provide a survival advantage to patients with advanced HCC, a predictive biomarker has not been developed. We studied whether c-Jun N-terminal kinase (JNK), which promotes liver carcinogenesis in mice, affects therapeutic response to sorafenib in HCC patients.

METHODS

We collected pathological specimens from 39 patients with advanced HCC before starting sorafenib treatment, and measured JNK activity in HCCs.

RESULTS

In patients treated with sorafenib, the expression of phospho-c-Jun in HCC, as a read out of JNK activity, was significantly higher (P<0.001) in the non-responder group than in the responder group. c-Jun N-terminal kinase activation in HCC was associated with a decreased time to progression and a poor overall survival (P=0.0028 and P=0.0008, respectively).

CONCLUSION

In addition, JNK activity was significantly correlated with CD133 expression level. Correspondingly, high expression level of CD133 was linked to a poor response to sorafenib. Furthermore, D-JNKi, a specific JNK inhibitor, reduced the growth of xenografted CD133(+) cells in athymic mice. In conclusion, JNK activation was positively correlated with CD133 expression level and inversely correlated with the therapeutic response to sorafenib, suggesting that JNK activity may be considered as a new predictive biomarker for response to sorafenib treatment.