Reporting of adjuvant breast cancer trials: when is the right time?

ANGPTL4 functions as an oncogene through regulation of the ETV5/CDH5/AKT/MMP9 axis to promote angiogenesis in ovarian cancer

BACKGROUND

Angiopoietin-like 4 (ANGPTL4) is highly expressed in a variety of neoplasms and promotes cancer progression. Nevertheless, the mechanism of ANGPTL4 in ovarian cancer (OC) metastasis remains unclear. This study aimeds to explore whether ANGPTL4 regulates OC progression and elucidate the underlying mechanism.

METHODS

ANGPTL4 expression in clinical patient tumor samples was determined by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and high-throughput sequencing. ANGPTL4 knockdown (KD) and the addition of exogeneous cANGPTL4 protein were used to investigate its function. An in vivo xenograft tumor experiment was performed by intraperitoneal injection of SKOV3 cells transfected with short hairpin RNAs (shRNAs) targeting ANGPTL4 in nude mice. Western blotting and qRT-PCR were used to detect the levels of ANGPTL4, CDH5, p-AKT, AKT, ETV5, MMP2 and MMP9 in SKOV3 and HO8910 cells transfected with sh-ANGPTL4 or shRNAs targeting ETV5.

RESULTS

Increased levels of ANGPTL4 were associated with poor prognosis and metastasis in OC and induced the angiogenesis and metastasis of OC cells both in vivo and in vitro. This tumorigenic effect was dependent on CDH5, and the expression levels of ANGPTL4 and CDH5 in human OC werepositively correlated. In addition, CDH5 activated p-AKT, and upregulated the expression of MMP2 and MMP9. We also found that the expression of ETV5 was upregulated by ANGPTL4, which could bind the promoter region of CDH5, leading to increased CDH5 expression.

CONCLUSION

Our data indicated that an increase in the ANGPTL4 level results in increased ETV5 expression in OC, leading to metastasis via activation of the CDH5/AKT/MMP9 signaling pathway.

Phase I trial of WEE1 inhibition with chemotherapy and radiotherapy as adjuvant treatment, and a window of opportunity trial with cisplatin in patients with head and neck cancer: the trial protocol

INTRODUCTION

Patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma with locally advanced disease often require multimodality treatment with surgery, radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy. Adjuvant radiotherapy with concurrent chemotherapy is offered to patients with high-risk pathological features postsurgery. While cure rates are improved, overall survival remains suboptimal and treatment has a significant negative impact on quality of life.Cell cycle checkpoint kinase inhibition is a promising method to selectively potentiate the therapeutic effects of chemoradiation. Our hypothesis is that combining chemoradiation with a WEE1 inhibitor will affect the biological response to DNA damage caused by cisplatin and radiation, thereby enhancing clinical outcomes, without increased toxicity. This trial explores the associated effect of WEE1 kinase inhibitor adavosertib (AZD1775).

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This phase I dose-finding, open-label, multicentre trial aims to determine the highest safe dose of AZD1775 in combination with cisplatin chemotherapy preoperatively (group A) as a window of opportunity trial, and in combination with postoperative cisplatin-based chemoradiation (group B).Modified time-to-event continual reassessment method will determine the recommended dose, recruiting up to 21 patients per group. Primary outcomes are recommended doses with predefined target dose-limiting toxicity probabilities of 25% monitored up to 42 days (group A), and 30% monitored up to 12 weeks (group B). Secondary outcomes are disease-free survival times (groups A and B). Exploratory objectives are evaluation of pharmacodynamic (PD) effects, identification and correlation of potential biomarkers with PD markers of DNA damage, determine rate of resection status and surgical complications for group A; and quality of life in group B.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Research Ethics Committee, Edgbaston, West Midlands (REC reference 16/WM/0501) initial approval received on 18/01/2017. Results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publication and presentation at international conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN76291951 and NCT03028766.

Addition of gemcitabine to paclitaxel, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide adjuvant chemotherapy for women with early-stage breast cancer (tAnGo): final 10-year follow-up of an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

The tAnGo trial was designed to investigate the potential role of gemcitabine when added to anthracycline and taxane-containing adjuvant chemotherapy for early breast cancer. When this study was developed, gemcitabine had shown significant activity in metastatic breast cancer, and there was evidence of a favourable interaction with paclitaxel.

METHODS

tAnGo was an international, open-label, randomised, phase 3 superiority trial that enrolled women aged 18 years or older with newly diagnosed, early-stage breast cancer who had a definite indication for chemotherapy, any nodal status, any hormone receptor status, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, and adequate bone marrow, hepatic, and renal function. Women were recruited from 127 clinical centres and hospitals in the UK and Ireland, and randomly assigned (1:1) to one of two treatment regimens: epirubicin, cyclophosphamide, and paclitaxel (four cycles of 90 mg/m2 intravenously administered epirubicin and 600 mg/m2 intravenously administered cyclophosphamide on day 1 every 3 weeks, followed by four cycles of 175 mg/m2 paclitaxel as a 3 h infusion on day 1 every 3 weeks) or epirubicin, cyclophosphamide, and paclitaxel plus gemcitabine (the same chemotherapy regimen as the other group, with the addition of 1250 mg/m2 gemcitabine to the paclitaxel cycles, administered intravenously as a 0·5 h infusion on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks). Patients were randomly assigned by a central computerised deterministic minimisation procedure, with stratification by country, age, radiotherapy intent, nodal status, and oestrogen receptor and HER-2 status. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival and the trial aimed to detect 5% differences in 5-year disease-free survival between the treatment groups. Recruitment completed in 2004 and this is the final, intention-to-treat analysis. This trial is registered with EudraCT (2004-002927-41), ISRCTN (51146252), and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00039546).

FINDINGS

Between Aug 22, 2001, and Nov 26, 2004, 3152 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to epirubicin, cyclophosphamide, paclitaxel, and gemcitabine (gemcitabine group; n=1576) or to epirubicin, cyclophosphamide, and paclitaxel (control group; n=1576). 11 patients (six in the gemcitabine group and five in the control group) were ineligible because of pre-existing metastases and were therefore excluded from the analysis. At this protocol-specified final analysis (median follow-up 10 years [IQR 10-10]), 1087 disease-free survival events and 914 deaths had occurred. Disease-free survival did not differ significantly between the treatment groups at 10 years (65% [63-68] in the gemcitabine group vs 65% [62-67] in the control group), and median disease-free survival was not reached (adjusted hazard ratio 0·97 [95% CI 0·86-1·10], p=0·64). Toxicity, dose intensity, and a detailed safety substudy showed both regimens to be safe, deliverable, and tolerable. Grade 3 and 4 toxicities were reported at expected levels in both groups. The most common were neutropenia (527 [34%] of 1565 patients in the gemcitabine group vs 412 [26%] of 1567 in the control group), myalgia and arthralgia (207 [13%] vs 186 [12%]), fatigue (207 [13%] vs 152 [10%]), infection (202 [13%] vs 141 [9%]), vomiting (143 [9%] vs 108 [7%]), and nausea (132 [8%] vs 102 [7%]).

INTERPRETATION

The addition of gemcitabine to anthracycline and taxane-based adjuvant chemotherapy at this dose and schedule confers no therapeutic advantage in terms of disease-free survival in early breast cancer, although it can cause increased toxicity. Therefore, gemcitabine has not been added to standard adjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer for any subgroup.

FUNDING

Cancer Research UK core funding for Clinical Trials Unit at the University of Birmingham, Eli Lilly, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Pfizer.

Publishing interim results of randomised clinical trials in peer-reviewed journals

BACKGROUND

Interim analyses of randomised controlled trials are sometimes published before the final results are available. In several cases, the treatment effects were noticeably different after patient recruitment and follow-up completed. We therefore conducted a literature review of peer-reviewed journals to compare the reported treatment effects between interim and final publications and to examine the magnitude of the difference.

METHODS

We performed an electronic search of MEDLINE from 1990 to 2014 (keywords: 'clinical trial' OR 'clinical study' AND 'random*' AND 'interim' OR 'preliminary'), and we manually identified the corresponding final publication. Where the electronic search produced a final report in which the abstract cited interim results, we found the interim publication. We also manually searched every randomised controlled trial in eight journals, covering a range of impact factors and general medical and specialist publications (1996-2014). All paired articles were checked to ensure that the same comparison between interventions was available in both.

RESULTS

In all, 63 studies are included in our review, and the same quantitative comparison was available in 58 of these. The final treatment effects were smaller than the interim ones in 39 (67%) trials and the same size or larger in 19 (33%). There was a marked reduction, defined as a ≥20% decrease in the size of the treatment effect from interim to final analysis, in 11 (19%) trials compared to a marked increase in 3 (5%), p = 0.057. The magnitude of percentage change was larger in trials where commercial support was reported, and increased as the proportion of final events at the interim report decreased in trials where commercial support was reported (interaction p = 0.023). There was no evidence of a difference between trials that stopped recruitment at the interim analysis where this was reported as being pre-specified versus those that were not pre-specified (interaction p = 0.87).

CONCLUSION

Published interim trial results were more likely to be associated with larger treatment effects than those based on the final report. Publishing interim results should be discouraged, in order to have reliable estimates of treatment effects for clinical decision-making, regulatory authority reviews and health economic analyses. Our work should be expanded to include conference publications and manual searches of additional journal publications.

Progresses and Challenges in Chemotherapy for Loco- Regionally Advanced Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma

Incidence rates of nasopharyngeal carcinoma are high in Indonesia, Singapore and South-Eastern China. Chemoradiotherapy has been the standard regimen for locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma according to guidelines from the National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Recently, advances in the management of nasopharyngeal carcinoma have transferred into better treatment outcomes. Most phase III clinical trials support the addition of concurrent chemotherapy to radiotherapy for the initial treatment of these patients. Studies evaluating effects and toxicity of concurrent chemotherapy with different regimens have been reported. However, the status of adding adjuvant chemotherapy or induction chemotherapy remains controversial. Recent studies have shown that adjuvant chemotherapy with two or three cycles may improve survival for nasopharyngeal carcinoma with stage N2-3 disease or with persistently detectable plasma EBV DNA after radiotherapy. This review examines the pertinent issues and latest studies concerning the management of loco-regionally advanced NPC, regarding concurrent chemotherapy, adjuvant chemotherapy, and induction chemotherapy in decades.

[Metastasized prostate cancer. Position paper on the use of chemotherapy]

BACKGROUND

Antihormonal and cytotoxic therapy options are available for the therapy of metastasized prostate cancer (mPC). Because no comparative studies are available, especially for castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRCP), it remains unclear which patients will profit best from which therapy.

OBJECTIVES

Previous data on the sequence of the various therapy options show that correct selection of the first line therapy for mCRPC can have an influence on the prognosis of the patient. In this position paper the various therapy options are critically illustrated and the clinical and pathohistological criteria for selection of the first line therapy of mCRPC are discussed.

RESULTS

Molecular markers are an important aid for future patient selection and individualized therapy for optimal use of the available forms of therapy.

Neoadjuvant trials in early breast cancer: pathological response at surgery and correlation to longer term outcomes - what does it all mean?

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant breast cancer trials are important for speeding up the introduction of new treatments for patients with early breast cancer and for the highly productive translational research which they facilitate. Meta-analysis of trial data shows clear correlation between pathological response at surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and longer-term outcomes at an individual patient level. However, this does not appear to be present on individual trial level analysis, when correlating improved outcome for the investigational arm for the primary endpoint (pathological response) with longer-term outcomes.

DISCUSSION

The correlation between pathological response and longer-term outcomes in trials is dependent on many factors. These include definitions of pathological response, both complete and partial; assessment methods for pathological response at surgery; subtype and prognosis of breast cancer at diagnosis; number of patients recruited; adjuvant treatments; the mechanism of action of the investigational drug; the length of follow-up at the time of reporting; the definitions used in longer-term outcomes analysis; clonal heterogeneity; and new adaptive trial designs with additional neo/adjuvant treatments. Future developments of neoadjuvant breast cancer trials are discussed. With so many factors influencing the correlation of longer-term outcomes for trial-level data, we conclude that the main focus of neoadjuvant trials should remain the primary endpoint of pathological response. Neoadjuvant breast cancer trials are very important investigational studies that will continue to increase our understanding of the disease and offer the potential of more rapid introduction of new treatments for women with high-risk early breast cancer. In the future, we are likely to see both novel trial designs adopted in the neoadjuvant context and modifications of neo/adjuvant treatments for pathological non-responders within clinical trials. Both of these have the intention of improving longer-term outcomes for patients who do not have a good pathological response to first-line neoadjuvant treatment. If successful, these developments are likely to reduce further any positive correlation between pathological response and longer-term outcomes.

Efficacy of neoadjuvant bevacizumab added to docetaxel followed by fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide, for women with HER2-negative early breast cancer (ARTemis): an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

The ARTemis trial was developed to assess the efficacy and safety of adding bevacizumab to standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy in HER2-negative early breast cancer.

METHODS

In this randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial, we enrolled women (≥18 years) with newly diagnosed HER2-negative early invasive breast cancer (radiological tumour size >20 mm, with or without axillary involvement), at 66 centres in the UK. Patients were randomly assigned via a central computerised minimisation procedure to three cycles of docetaxel (100 mg/m(2) once every 21 days) followed by three cycles of fluorouracil (500 mg/m(2)), epirubicin (100 mg/m(2)), and cyclophosphamide (500 mg/m(2)) once every 21 days (D-FEC), without or with four cycles of bevacizumab (15 mg/kg) (Bev+D-FEC). The primary endpoint was pathological complete response, defined as the absence of invasive disease in the breast and axillary lymph nodes, analysed by intention to treat. The trial has completed and follow-up is ongoing. This trial is registered with EudraCT (2008-002322-11), ISRCTN (68502941), and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01093235).

FINDINGS

Between May 7, 2009, and Jan 9, 2013, we randomly allocated 800 participants to D-FEC (n=401) and Bev+D-FEC (n=399). 781 patients were available for the primary endpoint analysis. Significantly more patients in the bevacizumab group achieved a pathological complete response compared with those treated with chemotherapy alone: 87 (22%, 95% CI 18-27) of 388 patients in the Bev+D-FEC group compared with 66 (17%, 13-21) of 393 patients in the D-FEC group (p=0·03). Grade 3 and 4 toxicities were reported at expected levels in both groups, although more patients had grade 4 neutropenia in the Bev+D-FEC group than in the D-FEC group (85 [22%] vs 68 [17%]).

INTERPRETATION

Addition of four cycles of bevacizumab to D-FEC in HER2-negative early breast cancer significantly improved pathological complete response. However, whether the improvement in pathological complete response will lead to improved disease-free and overall survival outcomes is unknown and will be reported after longer follow-up. Meta-analysis of available neoadjuvant trials is likely to be the only way to define subgroups of early breast cancer that would have clinically significant long-term benefit from bevacizumab treatment.

FUNDING

Cancer Research UK, Roche, Sanofi-Aventis.

Expression of nuclear factor kappa B (NF-κB) as a predictor of poor pathologic response to chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced breast cancer

BACKGROUND

NF-κB inhibits apoptosis through induction of antiapoptotic proteins and suppression of proapoptotic genes. Various chemotherapy agents induce NF-κB translocation and target gene activation. We conducted the present study to assess the predictive value of NF-κB regarding pathologic responses after receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We enrolled 131 patients with locally advanced invasive ductal breast carcinoma. Immunohistochemistry (IHC) was used to detect NF-κB expression. Evaluation of pathologic response was elaborated with the Ribero classification.

RESULTS

Expression of NF-κB was significantly associated with poor pathological response (p=0.02). From the multivariate analysis, it was found that the positive expression of NF-κB yielded RR=1.74 (95%CI 0.77 to 3.94).

CONCLUSIONS

NF-κB can be used as a predictor of poor pathological response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Biological pathways, candidate genes, and molecular markers associated with quality-of-life domains: an update

BACKGROUND

There is compelling evidence of a genetic foundation of patient-reported quality of life (QOL). Given the rapid development of substantial scientific advances in this area of research, the current paper updates and extends reviews published in 2010.

OBJECTIVES

The objective was to provide an updated overview of the biological pathways, candidate genes, and molecular markers involved in fatigue, pain, negative (depressed mood) and positive (well-being/happiness) emotional functioning, social functioning, and overall QOL.

METHODS

We followed a purposeful search algorithm of existing literature to capture empirical papers investigating the relationship between biological pathways and molecular markers and the identified QOL domains.

RESULTS

Multiple major pathways are involved in each QOL domain. The inflammatory pathway has the strongest evidence as a controlling mechanism underlying fatigue. Inflammation and neurotransmission are key processes involved in pain perception, and the catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) gene is associated with multiple sorts of pain. The neurotransmitter and neuroplasticity theories have the strongest evidence for their relationship with depression. Oxytocin-related genes and genes involved in the serotonergic and dopaminergic pathways play a role in social functioning. Inflammatory pathways, via cytokines, also play an important role in overall QOL.

CONCLUSIONS

Whereas the current findings need future experiments and replication efforts, they will provide researchers supportive background information when embarking on studies relating candidate genes and/or molecular markers to QOL domains. The ultimate goal of this area of research is to enhance patients' QOL.

Effects of the addition of gemcitabine, and paclitaxel-first sequencing, in neoadjuvant sequential epirubicin, cyclophosphamide, and paclitaxel for women with high-risk early breast cancer (Neo-tAnGo): an open-label, 2×2 factorial randomised phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Anthracyclines and taxanes have been the standard neoadjuvant chemotherapies for breast cancer in the past decade. We aimed to assess safety and efficacy of the addition of gemcitabine to accelerated paclitaxel with epirubicin and cyclophosphamide, and also the effect of sequencing the blocks of epirubicin and cyclophosphamide and paclitaxel (with or without gemcitabine).

METHODS

In our randomised, open-label, 2×2 factorial phase 3 trial (Neo-tAnGo), we enrolled women (aged >18 years) with newly diagnosed breast cancer (tumour size >20 mm) at 57 centres in the UK. Patients were randomly assigned via a central randomisation procedure to epirubicin and cyclophosphamide then paclitaxel (with or without gemcitabine) or paclitaxel (with or without gemcitabine) then epirubicin and cyclophosphamide. Four cycles of each component were given. The primary endpoint was pathological complete response (pCR), defined as absence of invasive cancer in the breast and axillary lymph nodes. This study is registered with EudraCT (2004-002356-34), ISRCTN (78234870), and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00070278).

FINDINGS

Between Jan 18, 2005, and Sept 28, 2007, we randomly allocated 831 participants; 207 received epirubicin and cyclophosphamide then paclitaxel; 208 were given paclitaxel then epirubicin and cyclophosphamide; 208 had epirubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by paclitaxel and gemcitabine; and 208 received paclitaxel and gemcitabine then epirubicin and cyclophosphamide. 828 patients were eligible for analysis. Median follow-up was 47 months (IQR 37-51). 207 (25%) patients had inflammatory or locally advanced disease, 169 (20%) patients had tumours larger than 50 mm, 413 (50%) patients had clinical involvement of axillary nodes, 276 (33%) patients had oestrogen receptor (ER)-negative disease, and 191 (27%) patients had HER2-positive disease. Addition of gemcitabine did not increase pCR: 70 (17%, 95% CI 14-21) of 404 patients in the epirubicin and cyclophosphamide then paclitaxel group achieved pCR compared with 71 (17%, 14-21) of 408 patients who received additional gemcitabine (p=0·98). Receipt of a taxane before anthracycline was associated with improved pCR: 82 (20%, 95% CI 16-24) of 406 patients who received paclitaxel with or without gemcitabine followed by epirubicin and cyclophosphamide achieved pCR compared with 59 (15%, 11-18) of 406 patients who received epirubicin and cyclophosphamide first (p=0·03). Grade 3 toxicities were reported at expected levels: 173 (21%) of 812 patients who received treatment and had full treatment details had grade 3 neutropenia, 66 (8%) had infection, 41 (5%) had fatigue, 41 (5%) had muscle and joint pains, 37 (5%) had nausea, 36 (4%) had vomiting, 34 (4%) had neuropathy, 23 (3%) had transaminitis, 16 (2%) had acute hypersensitivity, and 20 (2%) had a rash. 86 (11%) patients had grade 4 neutropenia and 3 (<1%) had grade 4 infection.

INTERPRETATION

Although addition of gemcitabine to paclitaxel and epirubicin and cyclophosphamide chemotherapy does not improve pCR, sequencing chemotherapy so that taxanes are received before anthracyclines could improve pCR in standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer.

FUNDING

Cancer Research UK, Eli Lilly, Bristol-Myers Squibb.

Management of low risk and low PSA prostate cancer: long term results from the prostate cancer intervention versus observation trial

Management of localized prostate cancer is controversial due in part to the lack of randomized controlled trial information in men diagnosed with prostate specific antigen (PSA) testing. Men with low risk or low PSA (<10 ng/ml) prostate cancer comprise up to 70 % of men currently diagnosed. Evidence suggests an excellent long-term prognosis with observation though nearly 90 % are treated with surgery (radical prostatectomy), external beam radiation, or brachytherapy. Results from the Prostate cancer Intervention Versus Observation Trial (PIVOT) provide high quality Level 1 evidence that observation compared to surgery results in similar long-term overall and prostate cancer survival, prevention of bone metastases and avoidance of surgery related harms. Combined with emerging evidence from screening, natural history, decision analysis and cost-effectiveness modeling studies, these data demonstrate that observation is the preferred treatment option for men with low risk and possibly low PSA prostate cancer. Recommending against PSA testing or, in men who still desire testing, raising thresholds of PSA values used to define abnormal, lengthening intervals between PSA tests and discontinuing testing in men with a life expectancy less than 15 years will reduce diagnostic and treatment related harms without adversely impacting overall or disease specific mortality and morbidity.