Final results from a randomized phase 3 study of FOLFIRI {+/-} panitumumab for second-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The study 20050181 demonstrated significant improvements in progression-free survival (PFS), objective response, and a nonsignificant trend toward increased overall survival (OS) with panitumumab-FOLFIRI versus FOLFIRI alone for second-line wild-type (WT) KRAS metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Updated long-term data from a prespecified descriptive analysis are reported.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients receiving one prior mCRC treatment were randomly assigned (1:1) to panitumumab (6.0 mg/kg)-FOLFIRI versus FOLFIRI every 2 weeks. Co-primary end points (PFS and OS) were prospectively analyzed by tumor KRAS status.

RESULTS

One thousand one hundred and eighty-six patients were randomly assigned. In patients with WT KRAS tumors, panitumumab-FOLFIRI significantly improved PFS versus FOLFIRI [median 6.7 versus 4.9 months; hazard ratio (HR) 0.82 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69, 0.97]; P = 0.023]. A trend toward longer OS was observed (median 14.5 versus 12.5 months; HR 0.92 [95% CI 0.78, 1.10]; P = 0.37). Response rates improved from 10% to 36% (P < 0.0001). From post hoc analyses in patients receiving prior oxaliplatin-bevacizumab, panitumumab-FOLFIRI improved PFS (median 6.4 versus 3.7 months; HR 0.58 [95% CI 0.37, 0.90]; P = 0.014). PFS and OS appeared longer for worst-grade skin toxicity of 2-4, versus 0-1 or FOLFIRI. Safety results were as previously reported and consistent with the known toxicities with anti-epidermal growth factor receptor therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

These data confirm the primary efficacy and safety findings of this trial and support panitumumab-FOLFIRI as a second-line treatment of WT KRAS mCRC.

Mutational profiling of the RAS, PI3K, MET and b-catenin pathways in cancer of unknown primary: a retrospective study of the Hellenic Cooperative Oncology Group

Cancer of unknown primary origin (CUP) had a poor prognosis, determined by clinico-histological characteristics, partly due to the lack of insights on its biology. We screened tumour DNA from 87 patients with CUP for CTNNB1 (coding exons 2,3,4,5), MET (coding exon 18), PIK3CA (coding exons 9,20), KRAS (coding exons 1,2), BRAF (coding exon 15) gene mutations by using dd-sequencing and evaluated their impact on prognosis. Mutated gene incidences in the 87 CUP cases were: KRAS 11 (12.6 %), BRAF 5 (5.7 %), PIK3CA 8 (9 %), MET 6 (6.7 %) and CTNNB1 18 (20.7 %). Several mutations in the KRAS gene were not the commonly encountered mutations in other solid tumours. Activating mutations were observed in 10.2 % in KRAS, 4.5 % in BRAF, 6.6 % in PIK3CA, 4.5 % in MET, and 19.5 % in CTNNB1. Activating mutations in PIK3CA coding exon 9 were inversely correlated with MET coding exon 18 activating mutations (p = 0.036). MET activating mutations were prognostic for poor Progression-Free Survival (median PFS 5 vs 9 months, p = 0.009) and Overall Survival (median OS 7 vs 20 months, p = 0.005). The complex profile of either CTNNB1 or MET mutations also had an adverse prognostic significance (median OS 11 vs 21 months, p = 0.015). No other gene mutation exhibited prognostic significance. In multivariate analysis, poor performance status, male gender, visceral disease and adenocarcinoma histology, but not gene mutations, were independently associated with poor patient outcome. CTNNB1 gene mutations are frequent, and along with MET mutations have an adverse prognostic effect in patients with CUP.

Abstract PD1-3: Ph1b study of the PI3K inhibitor GDC-0032 in combination with fulvestrant in patients with hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer

Background: GDC-0032 is a next-generation PI3K inhibitor with increased anti-tumor activity against PIK3CA mutant cancers. GDC-0032 is an orally bioavailable, potent, and selective inhibitor of Class I PI3K alpha, delta, and gamma isoforms, with 30-fold less inhibition of the PI3K beta isoform relative to the PI3K alpha isoform. Preclinical data show that GDC-0032 has enhanced activity against PI3K alpha isoform (PIK3CA) mutant breast cancer cell lines. Preclinical data also show enhanced antitumor activity when GDC-0032 is combined with fulvestrant.

Material and Methods: A Phase 1b dose escalation study was conducted with evaluation of GDC-0032 doses ranging from 6-9 mg QD in combination with fulvestrant 500mg q4wk (with loading dose of 500mg at day 1, 14 and 28) in a modified 3+3 design. A dose expansion cohort was conducted at the recommended Phase 2 dose of 6 mg QD. Safety and tolerability of GDC-0032 was assessed, as well as pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamic (PD) assessment of PI3K pathway inhibition by paired tumor biopsies and by FDG-PET, and anti-tumor activity by RECIST.

Results: As of 1 Mar 2013, 17 patients were enrolled onto this study with the completion of dose escalation. No dose limiting toxicities (DLTs) were observed at either the 6 mg or 9 mg dose levels. Adverse events (AEs) assessed by the investigator as related to GDC-0032 in ≥10% of patients, were diarrhea, hyperglycemia, stomatitis, fatigue, asthenia, decreased appetite, nausea, mucosal inflammation and rash. No observed apparent PK interactions were observed between GDC-0032 and fulvestrant. The median number of prior systemic therapies was 6. Metabolic partial responses via FDG-PET (≥ 20% decrease in mSUVmax) were observed in 8 out of 11 patients assessed (73%). Confirmed partial responses by RECIST have been observed at both the 6mg and 9mg GDC-0032 dose levels. These include patients who have had prior treatment with fulvestrant. As of 29 May 2013, enrollment onto the dose escalation and expansion cohort has been completed (n = 27). Updated data on safety, pharmacodynamics, efficacy, and biomarker correlates will be presented.

Conclusions: The combination of GDC-0032 and fulvestrant is a well-tolerated regimen with promising preliminary efficacy. GDC-0032 is being further investigated in combination with fulvestrant for patients with hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer.

Citation Information: Cancer Res 2013;73(24 Suppl): Abstract nr PD1-3.

Insights into the epithelial mesenchymal transition phenotype in cancer of unknown primary from a global microRNA profiling study

PURPOSE

We sought to study the microRNA regulation of epithelial mesenchymal transition (EMT), the acquisition of migratory, mesenchymal-like properties of epithelial cells, in cancer of unknown primary (CUP).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We studied the global expression profile of 982 microRNAs by means of microarray technology in 68 CUP cases immunohistochemically characterised as EMT-positive (n = 5 by % of cells or n = 10 by a semiquantitative H-score) or EMT-negative.

RESULTS

EMT-suppressive miRNAs such as miR-203 and members of the miR-200 family (miR-200a,b,c and miR-141) presented a 2.45 to 3.64-fold lower expression level in the EMT-positive cases without, however, reaching statistical significance. MiR-205, a squamous tissue-specific marker, was very variable in the data set. Excluding CUP cases with squamous cell histology, miR-205, miR-203 and the miR-200 family exhibited a trend of downregulation in EMT-positive cases. A similar pattern of miRNA expression was detected when the comparison took place between EMT-positive vs EMT-negative cases according to the H-score. Moreover, miR-203, miR-205 and miR-200c were numerically downregulated in those tumours with high expression of the EMT marker N-cadherin.

CONCLUSIONS

The EMT-suppressive miR-203 and miR-200 family were consistently but non-significantly downregulated in CUP with the EMT phenotype. A larger study is warranted to further explore the role of microRNAs in CUP.

HER2 in high-risk rectal cancer patients treated in EXPERT-C, a randomized phase II trial of neoadjuvant capecitabine and oxaliplatin (CAPOX) and chemoradiotherapy (CRT) with or without cetuximab

BACKGROUND

HER2 is an established therapeutic target in breast and gastric cancers. The role of HER2 in rectal cancer is unclear, as conflicting data on the prevalence of HER2 expression in this disease have been reported. We evaluated the prevalence of HER2 and its impact on the outcome of high-risk rectal cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant CAPOX and CRT±cetuximab in the EXPERT-C trial.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eligible patients with available tumour tissue for HER2 analysis were included. HER2 expression was determined by immunohistochemistry (IHC) in pre-treatment biopsies and/or surgical specimens (score 0-3+). Immunostaining was scored according to the consensus panel recommendations on HER2 scoring for gastric cancer. Tumours with equivocal IHC result (2+) were tested for HER2 amplification by D-ISH. Tumours with IHC 3+ or D-ISH ratio ≥2.0 were classified as HER2+. The impact of HER2 on primary and secondary end points of the study was analysed.

RESULTS

Of 164 eligible study patients, 104 (63%) biopsy and 114 (69%) surgical specimens were available for analysis. Only 3 of 104 (2.9%) and 3 of 114 (2.6%) were HER2+, respectively. In 77 patients with paired specimens, concordance for HER2 status was found in 74 (96%). Overall, 141 patients were assessable for HER2 and 6 out of 141 (4.3%) had HER2 overexpression and/or amplification. The median follow-up was 58.6 months. HER2 was not associated with a difference in the outcome for any of the study end points, including in the subset of 90 KRAS/BRAF wild-type patients treated±cetuximab.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the low prevalence of expression as recorded in the EXPERT-C trial, HER2 does not appear to represent a useful therapeutic target in high-risk rectal cancer. However, the role of HER2 as a potential predictive biomarker of resistance to anti-EGFR-based treatments and a therapeutic target in anti-EGFR refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) warrants further investigation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN Register: 99828560.

GEICO (Spanish Group for Investigation on Ovarian Cancer) treatment guidelines in ovarian cancer 2012

In 2006, under the auspices of The Spanish Research Group for Ovarian Cancer (Spanish initials GEICO), the first "Treatment Guidelines in Ovarian Cancer" were developed and then published in Clinical and Translational Oncology by Poveda Velasco et al. (Clin Transl Oncol 9(5):308-316, 2007). Almost 6 years have elapsed and over this time, we have seen some important developments in the treatment of ovarian cancer. Significant changes were also introduced after the GCIG-sponsored 4th Consensus Conference on Ovarian Cancer by Stuart et al. (Int J Gynecol Cancer 21:750-755, 2011). So we decided to update the treatment guidelines in ovarian cancer and, with this objective, a group of investigators of the GEICO group met in February 2012. This study summarizes the presentations, discussions and evidence that were reviewed during the meeting and during further discussions of the manuscript.