Randomized Phase II Study with Cetuximab in Combination with 5-FU and Cisplatin or Carboplatin vs. Cetuximab in Combination with Paclitaxel and Carboplatin for Treatment of Patients with Relapsed or Metastatic Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck (CETMET Trial)

Therapeutic Advances and Challenges for the Management of HPV-Associated Oropharyngeal Cancer

The use of conventional chemotherapy in conjunction with targeted and immunotherapy drugs has emerged as an option to limit the severity of side effects in patients diagnosed with head and neck cancer (HNC), particularly oropharyngeal cancer (OPC). OPC prevalence has increased exponentially in the past 30 years due to the prevalence of human papillomavirus (HPV) infection. This study reports a comprehensive review of clinical trials registered in public databases and reported in the literature (PubMed/Medline, Scopus, and ISI web of science databases). Of the 55 clinical trials identified, the majority (83.3%) were conducted after 2015, of which 77.7% were performed in the United States alone. Eight drugs have been approved by the FDA for HNC, including both generic and commercial forms: bleomycin sulfate, cetuximab (Erbitux), docetaxel (Taxotere), hydroxyurea (Hydrea), pembrolizumab (Keytruda), loqtorzi (Toripalimab-tpzi), methotrexate sodium (Trexall), and nivolumab (Opdivo). The most common drugs to treat HPV-associated OPC under these clinical trials and implemented as well for HPV-negative HNC include cisplatin, nivolumab, cetuximab, paclitaxel, pembrolizumab, 5-fluorouracil, and docetaxel. Few studies have highlighted the necessity for new drugs specifically tailored to patients with HPV-associated OPC, where molecular mechanisms and clinical prognosis are distinct from HPV-negative tumors. In this context, we identified most mutated genes found in HPV-associated OPC that can represent potential targets for drug development. These include TP53, PIK3CA, PTEN, NOTCH1, RB1, FAT1, FBXW7, HRAS, KRAS, and CDKN2A.

High Response Rate to Carboplatin-Paclitaxel-Cetuximab and Pembrolizumab in Patients with Recurrent and/or Metastatic Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma

The management of R/M HNSCC is rapidly evolving with new available treatment molecules and combination modalities. Anti-EGFR cetuximab (CTX) and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) can be used either alone or in combination with conventional platinum-based doublet chemotherapy (with taxanes or fluorouracil). No data have been reported to date on the association of doublet chemotherapy concomitantly with both CTX and ICI. We present a case series of patients treated with 4 cycles of quadritherapy, every 3 weeks, including paclitaxel 175 mg/m², carboplatin AUC 5, pembrolizumab 200 mg, and weekly 250 mg/m² CTX. All patients achieved an objective response (6 complete responses, 2 partial responses). Clinical response was fast, so 1 patient avoided an emergency tracheostomy for laryngeal dyspnea. Four patients furtherly benefited from cisplatin-based chemoradiotherapy on residual tumor sites after the response to quadritherapy. Adverse events were manageable, except for an ICI-related liver toxicity in a patient. Overall, this short series indicates that a quadruple therapy with carboplatin-paclitaxel-CTX and pembrolizumab seems to be safe and active in patients with R/M HNSCC. This observation could be confirmed through further clinical trials.

Antineoplastic multi-drug chemotherapy to sensitize tumors triggers multi-drug resistance and inhibits efficiency of maintenance treatment inglioblastoma cells

Combinations of the well-known antineoplastic agents 5-fluorouracil (5-Fu), cisplatin, and paclitaxel are employed to increase radiotherapy/immunotherapy efficacy against persistent and resistant tumors. However, data remains needed on the hormetic, chronic, and long-term side effects of these aggressive combination chemotherapies. Here we investigated cellular and molecular responses associated with these combined agents, and their potential to induce multi-drug resistance against the temozolomide (TMZ) and etoposide (EP) used in glioblastoma maintenance treatment. We analyzed resistance and survival signals in U87 MG cells using molecular probes, fluorescent staining, qRT-PCR, and immunoblot. Repeated treatment with combined 5-Fu, cisplatin, and paclitaxel induced cross-resistance against TMZ and EP. Resistant cells exhibited elevated gene/protein expression of MRP1/ABCC1, ABCC2, BRCP/ABCG2, and GST. Moreover, they managed oxidative stress, cell cycle, apoptosis, and autophagy signaling to ensure survival. In these groups TMZ and etoposide efficiency dramatically reduced. Our result suggests that combined high-dose treatments of classical antineoplastic agents to sensitize tumors may trigger multi-drug resistance and inhibit maintenance treatment. When deciding on antineoplastic combination therapy for persistent/resistant glioblastoma, we recommend analyzing the long-term hormetic and chronic effects on cross-resistance and multi-drug resistance in primary cell cultures from patients. See also the Graphical Abstract(Fig. 1).

Biweekly administration of cetuximab in Japanese patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck cancer

BACKGROUND

Cetuximab (Cmab) plays an important role in the treatment for recurrent or metastatic head and neck cancer (R/M HNC). To date, however, no safety data on biweekly administration of cetuximab at a dose of 500 mg/m² (biweekly Cmab) for Japanese HNC patients have been available.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the clinical records of five R/M HNC patients who received biweekly Cmab in our institute between January 2016 and September 2021 and compared the safety profile between two phases of weekly 250 mg/m² and biweekly 500 mg/m² Cmab in the identical patients.

RESULTS

All patients initially received Cmab in combination with chemotherapy. Chemotherapy consisted of paclitaxel plus carboplatin in two patients, cisplatin + 5-FU in one patient, and paclitaxel in two patients. Three patients switched treatment schedule from weekly Cmab to biweekly Cmab, while two patients received biweekly Cmab after completion of chemotherapy. The main reason for switching to biweekly Cmab was an unacceptably long commuting time to the hospital. The median duration of Cmab was 217 days (49-321) during weekly Cmab with or without chemotherapy and 42 days (28-175) during biweekly Cmab. Median dose of biweekly Cmab was 4 (3-12). During biweekly Cmab, worsened (Grade ≥ 2) toxicities were observed in two patients: one with grade 2 dry skin and the second with grade 2 skin infection. None developed grade ≥ 3 adverse events or discontinued treatment due to Cmab-related adverse events.

CONCLUSION

Biweekly Cmab was well tolerated and did not demonstrate severe toxicities related to Cmab for R/M HNC.

Paclitaxel and Cisplatin with or without Cetuximab in metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: A randomized, multicenter, open-label Phase II trial

Lack of effective targeted therapy in metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) underscores the urgent need for identifying new treatment approaches for this challenging disease. We sought to assess the addition of cetuximab to paclitaxel-cisplatin chemotherapy for first-line treatment in patients with metastatic ESCC. In this randomized, multicenter, open-label, phase II clinical trial, patients were randomized to receive paclitaxel-cisplatin (TP) (paclitaxel [175 mg/m² intravenously (i.v.) on day 1 of every 3-week cycle] and cisplatin [75 mg/m² i.v. on day 1 of every 3-week cycle]) and TP plus cetuximab (CTP) (cetuximab, 400 mg/m² i.v. on day 1 of week 1, followed by 250 mg/m² weekly), respectively. Targeted next-generation sequencing (NGS) was performed on 89 tumor samples for biomarker exploration. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) in the intention-to-treat population. With a median follow-up of 22.6 months, median PFS was 5.7 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.8–7.0) in patients administered CTP versus 4.2 months (95% CI: 3.0–5.3) in the TP group (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.61; 95% CI: 0.40–0.93; p = 0.02). Median overall survival was 11.5 months (95% CI: 7.9–13.1) in the CTP group and 10.5 months (95% CI: 9.0–13.2) in the TP arm (HR = 0.98; 95% CI: 0.67–1.44; p = 0.91). The most common reported greater than or equal to grade 3 adverse events were neutropenia (35.2% versus 22.4%) and leukopenia (25.4% versus 13.2%). In patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) amplification tumors (15.7%), PFS was improved with CTP compared with TP treatment (HR = 0.11; 95% CI: 0.01–0.98; p = 0.018). First-line CTP significantly improves PFS, with a manageable safety profile in patients with metastatic ESCC.

•

Compare the effect of Cetuximab + chemotherapy with chemotherapy alone in ESCC

•

CTP regimen improves progression-free survival with a manageable safety profile

•

ESCC patients with EGFR amplification obtain greater therapeutic benefit from CTP

•

CTP regimen represents a new treatment option for ESCC

First-line cisplatin, docetaxel, and cetuximab for patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck cancer: A multicenter cohort study

BACKGROUND

The targeted therapy cetuximab [directed at the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)] in combination with 5-fluorouracil and platinum-based chemotherapy (the EXTREME regimen) has shown substantial efficacy for patients with recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (R/M SCCHN). Thus, this scheme has been established as the preferred first-line option for these patients. However, more recently, a new strategy combining platinum, taxanes, and cetuximab (the TPEx regimen) has demonstrated similar efficacy with a more favorable toxicity profile in clinical trials.

AIM

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of the TPEx scheme as first-line therapy in advanced SCCHN in a multicenter cohort study.

METHODS

This retrospective multicenter cohort study included patients with histologically confirmed recurrent or metastatic SCCHN treated with first-line TPEx at five medical centers in Argentina between January 1, 2017 and April 31, 2020. Chemotherapy consisted of four cycles of docetaxel, cisplatin, and cetuximab followed by cetuximab maintenance therapy. Clinical outcomes and toxicity profiles were collected from medical charts. Treatment response was assessed by the investigator in accordance with Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (version 1.1). Adverse events were graded according to the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (version 4.0).

RESULTS

Twenty-four patients were included. The median age at diagnosis was 58 years (range: 36-77 years). The majority of patients (83.3%) received at least four chemotherapy cycles in the initial phase. In the included group, the overall response rate was 62.5%, and 3 patients achieved a complete response (12.5%). The median time to response was 2.4 mo [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.3-3.5]. With a median follow-up of 12.7 mo (95%CI: 8.8-16.6), the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 6.9 mo (95%CI: 6.5-7.3), and the overall survival rate at 12 mo was 82.4%. Patients with documented tumor response showed a better PFS than those with disease stabilization or progression [8.5 mo (95%CI: 5.5-11.5) and 4.5 mo (95%CI: 2.5-6.6), respectively; P = 0.042]. Regarding the safety analysis, two-thirds of patients reported at least one treatment-related adverse event, and 25% presented grade 3 toxicities. Of note, no patient experienced grade 4 adverse events.

CONCLUSION

TPEx was an adequately tolerated regimen in our population, with low incidence of grade 3-4 adverse events. The median PFS were consistent with those in recent reports of clinical trials evaluating this treatment combination. This regimen may be considered an attractive therapeutic strategy due to its simplified administration, decreased total number of chemotherapy cycles, and treatment tolerability.

Weekly Paclitaxel, Carboplatin, and Cetuximab as First-Line Treatment of Recurrent and/or Metastatic Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma for Patients Ineligible to Cisplatin-Based Chemotherapy: A Retrospective Monocentric Study in 60 Patients

Objective

For most patients suffering from recurrent and/or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (R/M HNSCC), chemotherapy is the main option after considering surgery and reirradiation. Cetuximab combined with a platinum-fluorouracil regimen (EXTREME) has been the standard of care for over a decade. Nevertheless, a significant number of patients remain unfit for this regimen because of age, severe comorbidities, or poor performance status. The aim of this study is to investigate an alternative regimen with sufficient efficacy and safety.

Methods

We reviewed retrospectively the medical charts of all patients treated with paclitaxel, carboplatin, and cetuximab (PCC) at our institution. Eligibility criteria were as follows: first-line R/M-HNSCC of the oral cavity, oropharynx, hypopharynx, or larynx not suitable for local therapy, cisplatin, and/or 5-FU ineligibility, ECOG-PS: 0–2. PCC consisted of paclitaxel 80 mg/m², carboplatin AUC 2, and cetuximab at an initial dose of 400 mg/m² then 250 mg/m², for 16 weekly administrations followed by cetuximab maintenance for patients for whom a disease control was obtained. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), and secondary endpoints were overall response rate (ORR), progression free survival (PFS), and safety.

Results

We identified 60 consecutive patients treated with PCC between 2010 and 2016 at our institution. Thirty-one patients (52%) were ECOG-PS 2. Fifty-five patients (92%) were cisplatin ineligible. ORR was 43.3% (95% CI, 30.8–55.8), and disease control rate was 65% (95% CI, 52.9–77.1). With a median follow-up of 35.7 months (IQR 28.6–48.8), median PFS was 5.8 months (95% CI, 4.5–7.2), and median OS was 11.7 months (95% CI, 7.5-14.8). For ECOG-PS 0–1 patients, median OS was 14.8 months (95% CI, 12.2–21.7) while it was only 7.5 months (95%CI: 5.5-12.7) for ECOG-PS 2 patients (p < 0.04). Grades III–IV toxicities occurred in 30 patients (50%). Most toxicities were hematologic. Six patients (10%) had febrile neutropenia. Nonhematologic toxicities were reported such as cutaneous toxicities, neuropathy, infusion-related reactions, or electrolyte disorders.

Conclusion

The weekly PCC regimen seems to be an interesting option in cisplatin-unfit patients. This study shows favorable PFS and OS when compared with what is achieved with the EXTREME regimen and a high controlled disease rate with predictable and manageable toxicities even in the more fragile population.

Tegafur-Uracil versus 5-Fluorouracil in Combination with Cisplatin and Cetuximab in Elderly Patients with Recurrent or Metastatic Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

Simple Summary

Elderly patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma are a unique subset because they are at increased risks of miserable prognosis. Although cisplatin, 5-fluorouracil plus cetuximab (EXTREME) is the most commonly used regimen, chemotherapy de-escalation strategy was suggested in elderly patients due to toxicity. Herein, an oral tegafur–uracil is usually substituted for 5-fluorouracil and combined with cisplatin plus cetuximab (UPEx) as a novel agent for elderly patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. The median progression-free survival was 5.4 months in UPEx and 5.8 months in EXTREME (p = 0.451). The median overall survival was 10.8 months in UPEx and 10.2 months in EXTREME (p = 0.807). Grade 3/4 adverse events were much fewer in UPEx than in EXTREME (p < 0.001). Our study demonstrated that UPEx is effective with improving safety profiles. We suggested UPEx might be a better treatment option for elderly patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.

Abstract

There are increasing incidences of elderly patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (R/M HNSCC). However, the treatment is not yet established. We conducted a propensity score matching analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of tegafur–uracil versus 5-fluorouracil in combination with cisplatin plus cetuximab in elderly patients with R/M HNSCC. Elderly patients with R/M HNSCC treated with cetuximab-containing chemotherapy were recruited into this study. In order to reduce the selection bias, propensity score matching was performed. Kaplan–Meier curves were plotted for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Toxicities were graded according to the National Cancer Institute’s Common Terminology Criteria V3.0. After propensity sore matching, 54 patients with tegafur–uracil, cisplatin plus cetuximab (UPEx), and 54 patients with 5-fluorouracil, cisplatin plus cetuximab (EXTREME) were identified. The median PFS was 5.4 months in UPEx and 5.8 months in EXTREME (p = 0.451). The median OS was 10.8 months in UPEx and 10.2 months in EXTREME (p = 0.807). The overall response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR) were insignificant in both arms, accounting for 61% versus 59% (p = 0.680) and 72% versus 70% (p = 0.732) in the UPEx arm and the EXTREME arm, respectively. A multivariate analysis showed that age and ECOG PS were, independently, predictors. Grade 3/4 adverse events were much fewer in UPEx than in EXTREME (p < 0.001). Both cetuximab-containing chemotherapies are effective in elderly patients with R/M HNSCC. Safety profiles are improved when tegafur–uracil is substituted for 5-fluorouracil. Further prospective studies are warranted to validate our conclusions.

Immune-checkpoint inhibitor plus chemotherapy versus conventional chemotherapy for treatment of recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Background:

Multiple therapies including immune-checkpoint inhibitors are emerging as effective treatment for patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (R/M HNSSC). However, the optimal first-line and second-line treatments remains controversial.

Methods:

We systematically searched databases and conducted a systematic review of phase II/III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared two or more treatments for R/M HNSSC. Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and adverse events (AEs) ⩾3 with hazard ratios (HRs) were extracted and synthesized based on a frequentist network meta-analysis.

Results:

Twenty-six trials involving 8908 patients were included. Of first-line treatments, pembrolizumab plus cisplatin plus 5-fluorouracil is associated with significantly improved OS (P-score = 0.91) and TPEx ranked first for prolonging PFS (0.91). EXTREME plus docetaxel (0.18) ranked lowest for AEs ⩾3. Of second-line treatments, nivolumab was the highest-ranked treatment for prolonging OS (0.95), while buparlisib plus paclitaxel was the highest-ranked treatment for PFS (0.94). Subgroup analyses suggested that nivolumab was significantly associated with improvement of OS in patients with high PD-L1 expression (HR 0.55, 0.43–0.70), whereas its OS benefit is similar with conventional chemotherapy for those with low PD-L1 expression. Buparlisib plus paclitaxel showed the best OS benefit in subgroups of patients with HPV-negative status, and with oral cavity or larynx as primary tumor sites.

Conclusions:

Pembrolizumab plus cisplatin plus 5-fluorouracil is likely to be the best first-line treatment when OS is a priority. Otherwise, TPEx should be the optimal first-line option due to its superior PFS prolongation efficacy, best safety profile, and similar OS benefit with pembrolizumab plus cisplatin plus 5-fluorouracil. Nivolumab appears to be the best second-line option with best OS prolongation efficacy and outstanding safety profile in the overall population. Future RCTs with meticulous grouping of patients and detailed reporting are urgently needed for individualized treatment.