Real-world outcomes according to treatment strategies in ALK-rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients: an Italian retrospective study

PURPOSE

Anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) rearrangement confers sensitivity to ALK inhibitors (ALKis) in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Although several drugs provided an impressive outcome benefit, the most effective sequential strategy is still unknown. We describe outcomes of real-life patients according to the treatment strategy received.

PATIENTS

We retrospectively collected 290 ALK rearranged advanced NSCLC diagnosed between 2011 and 2017 in 23 Italian institutions.

RESULTS

After a median follow-up of 26 months, PFS for crizotinib and a new generation ALKis were 9.4 [CI 95% 7.9-11.2] and 11.1 months [CI 95% 9.2-13.8], respectively, while TTF were 10.2 [CI 95% 8.5-12.6] and 11.9 months [CI 95% 9.7-17.4], respectively, being consistent across the different settings. The composed outcomes (the sum of PFS or TTF) in patients treated with crizotinib followed by a new generation ALKis were 27.8 months [CI 95% 24.3-33.7] in PFS and 30.4 months [CI 95% 24.7-34.9] in TTF. The median OS from the diagnosis of advanced disease was 39 months [CI 95% 31.8-54.5]. Patients receiving crizotinib followed by a new generation ALKis showed a higher median OS [57 months (CI 95% 42.0-73.8)] compared to those that did not receive crizotinib [38 months (CI 95% 18.6-NR)] and those who performed only crizotinib as target agent [15 months (CI 95% 11.3-34.0)] (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

The sequential administration of crizotinib and a new generation ALKis provided a remarkable clinical benefit in this real-life population, being an interesting option to consider in selected patients.

Single-Agent Chemotherapy with Vinorelbine for Pretreated or Metastatic Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Esophagus

Aims and Background

At least half of the patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus (SCCE) present at diagnosis with metastatic disease, and most patients in a locally advanced phase will develop metastases despite potentially curative local therapy. Thus, the majority of patients with SCCE will become candidate for palliative chemotherapy. Only a few drugs have demonstrated moderate activity (>15%) against SCCE. The main purpose of this phase II trial was to assess the activity of vinorelbine, a semisynthetic vinca alkaloid with a wide spectrum of action, in advanced or relapsed SCCE.

Methods

Seventeen patients were included in the trial. Eleven of them had already received chemotherapy (cisplatin and fluorouracil) and/or radiotherapy at the time of the first diagnosis All patients were treated with vinorelbine at the dose of 30 mg/m2 every two weeks.

Results

Sixteen of the 17 patients enrolled in the trial were assessable for activity: partial responses were observed in 4 of the 16 (25%), and 3 of them were pretreated patients. A significant improvement of dysphagia was obtained in 4 of 11 symptomatic patients. Toxicity was mild, with only one episode of grade 4 neutropenia and constipation.

Conclusions

In our experience, single-agent vinorelbine is active against SCCE. It was also active in patients previously treated with cisplatin and fluorouracil. The good tolerability and the possibility of relieving symptoms such as dysphagia strongly suggest the addition of vinorelbine to combination regimens with cisplatin as front-line chemotherapy for SCCE.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study of a ginger extract in the management of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in patients receiving high-dose cisplatin

BACKGROUND

The activity of ginger in the management of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) has been suggested, but design inadequacies, heterogeneity of the population, small numbers and poor quality of tested products limit the possibility to offer generalizable results.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study in patients planned to receive ≥2 chemotherapy cycles with high dose (>50 mg/m2) cisplatin. Patients received ginger 160 mg/day (with standardized dose of bioactive compounds) or placebo in addition to the standard antiemetic prophylaxis for CINV, starting from the day after cisplatin administration. CINV was assessed through daily visual-analogue scale and Functional Living Index Emesis questionnaires. The main objective was protection from delayed nausea; secondary end points included intercycle nausea and nausea anticipatory symptoms.

RESULTS

In total, 121 patients received ginger and 123 placebo. Lung (49%) and head and neck cancer (HNC; 35%) were the most represented tumors. No differences were reported in terms of safety profile or compliance. The incidence of delayed, intercycle and anticipatory nausea did not differ between the two arms in the first cycle and second cycle. A benefit of ginger over placebo in Functional Living Index Emesis nausea score differences (day 6-day 1) was identified for females (P = 0.048) and HNC patients (P = 0.038).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients treated with high-dose cisplatin, the daily addition of ginger, even if safe, did not result in a protective effect on CINV. The favorable effect observed on nausea in subgroups at particular risk of nausea (females; HNC) deserves specific investigation.

Targeted therapies and immunotherapy in non-small-cell lung cancer

Non-small-cell lung cancer is still considered a difficult disease to manage because of its aggressiveness and resistance to common therapies. Chemotherapy remains the gold standard in nearly 80% of lung cancers, but clinical outcomes are discouraging, and the impact on median overall survival (OS) barely reaches 12 months. At the end of the last century, the discovery of oncogene-driven tumours completely changed the therapeutic landscape in lung cancers, harbouring specific gene mutations/translocations. Epidermal growth factors receptor (EGFR) common mutations first and anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) translocations later led new insights in lung cancer biology knowledge. The use of specific tyrosine kinases inhibitors overturned the biological behaviour of EGFR mutation positive tumours and became a preclinical model to understand the heterogeneity of lung cancers and the mechanisms of drug resistance. In this review, we summarise the employment of targeted agents against the most representative biomolecular alterations and provide some criticisms of the therapeutic strategies.

Phase II study of pemetrexed and carboplatin plus bevacizumab as first-line therapy in malignant pleural mesothelioma

Background:

The aim of this open label phase II study (NCT00407459) was to assess the activity of the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitor bevacizumab combined with pemetrexed and carboplatin in patients with previously untreated, unresectable malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM).

Methods:

Eligible patients received pemetrexed 500 mg m⁻², carboplatin area under the plasma concentration–time curve (AUC) 5 mg ml⁻¹ per minute and bevacizumab 15 mg kg⁻¹, administered intravenously every 21 days for six cycles, followed by maintenance bevacizumab. The primary end point of the study was progression-free survival (PFS). A 50% improvement in median PFS in comparison with standard pemetrexed/platinum combinations (from 6 to 9 months) was postulated.

Results:

Seventy-six patients were evaluable for analysis. A partial response was achieved in 26 cases (34.2%, 95% CI 23.7–46.0%). Forty-four (57.9%, 95% CI 46.0–69.1%) had stable disease. Median PFS and overall survival were 6.9 and 15.3 months, respectively. Haematological and non-haematological toxicities were generally mild; however, some severe adverse events were reported, including grade 3–4 fatigue in 8% and bowel perforation in 4% of patients. Three toxic deaths occurred.

Conclusion:

The primary end point of the trial was not reached. However, due to the limitation of a non-randomised phase II design, further data are needed before drawing any definite conclusion on the role of bevacizumab in MPM.

The chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy outcome measures standardization study: from consensus to the first validity and reliability findings

BACKGROUND

Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is a debilitating and dose-limiting complication of cancer treatment. Thus far, the impact of CIPN has not been studied in a systematic clinimetric manner. The objective of the study was to select outcome measures for CIPN evaluation and to establish their validity and reproducibility in a cross-sectional multicenter study.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

After literature review and a consensus meeting among experts, face/content validity were obtained for the following selected scales: the National Cancer Institute-Common Toxicity Criteria (NCI-CTC), the Total Neuropathy Score clinical version (TNSc), the modified Inflammatory Neuropathy Cause and Treatment (INCAT) group sensory sumscore (mISS), the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30, and CIPN20 quality-of-life measures. A total of 281 patients with stable CIPN were examined. Validity (correlation) and reliability studies were carried out.

RESULTS

Good inter-/intra-observer scores were obtained for the TNSc, mISS, and NCI-CTC sensory/motor subscales. Test-retest values were also good for the EORTC QLQ-C30 and CIPN20. Acceptable validity scores were obtained through the correlation among the measures.

CONCLUSION

Good validity and reliability scores were demonstrated for the set of selected impairment and quality-of-life outcome measures in CIPN. Future studies are planned to investigate the responsiveness aspects of these measures.

Peripheral neurotoxicity of oxaliplatin in combination with 5-fluorouracil (FOLFOX) or capecitabine (XELOX): a prospective evaluation of 150 colorectal cancer patients

BACKGROUND

To report our prospective experience on the incidence and pattern of oxaliplatin (OXA)-induced peripheral neuropathy (OXA-IPN) in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) treated with either FOLFOX-4 or XELoda + OXaliplatin (XELOX).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

One hundred and fifty patients scheduled to be treated with either FOLFOX or XELOX for CRC were prospectively monitored at baseline and followed-up during chemotherapy. The incidence and severity of symptoms secondary to OXA-IPN were recorded using three different types of assessment, i.e. the motor and neurosensory National Cancer Institute common toxicity criteria, version 3.0 (NCI-CTCv3), the clinical version of the total neuropathy score (TNSc) and electrophysiological scores.

RESULTS

Patients treated with either FOLFOX-4 or XELOX manifested similar incidence rates and severities of acute OXA-IPN. However, FOLFOX-4 was associated with increased incidence of chronic neurotoxicity, compared with XELOX-treated patients (n = 64/77 versus 44/73; P = 0.002), at a very similar OXA median cumulative dose during both regimens. Both the NCI-CTCv3 and TNSc demonstrated that the severity of cumulative OXA-IPN in FOLFOX-4-treated patients is higher than in those treated with XELOX.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of acute neurotoxicity during FOLFOX-4 therapy is similar to XELOX. However, it seems that FOLFOX-4 is more neurotoxic than XELOX in terms of cumulative OXA-IPN, despite comparable OXA cumulative dose.

Gefitinib as first-line treatment for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with activating epidermal growth factor receptor mutation: Review of the evidence

Gefitinib is a small molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitor of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). Since 2004, it was clear that a substantial proportion of non-small-cell lung cancers (NSCLC) obtaining objective response when treated with gefitinib harbour activating mutations in the EGFR gene. Consequently, EGFR mutation has been widely studied, together with other molecular characteristics, as a potential predictive factor for gefitinib efficacy. As of August 2010, four East Asian randomized phase III trials comparing gefitinib to platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) eligible for first-line treatment have been reported or published. Two of these trials were conducted without a molecular selection in patients with clinical characteristics (adenocarcinoma histology, never or light smoking) characterized by higher prevalence of EGFR mutation. In patients selected for the presence of tumor harbouring EGFR mutation, the administration of first-line gefitinib, as compared to standard chemotherapy, was associated with longer progression-free survival, higher objective response rate, a more favourable toxicity profile and better quality of life. The relevant improvement in progression-free survival with first-line administration of gefitinib has been confirmed in the other two randomized trials, dedicated to cases with EGFR mutation. In July 2009, European Medicines Agency granted marketing authorization for gefitinib for the treatment of locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC with sensitizing mutations of the EGFR gene, across all lines of therapy. Gefitinib currently represents the best first-line treatment option for this molecularly selected subgroup of patients.

Gefitinib as first-line treatment for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with activating Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor mutation: implications for clinical practice and open issues

Randomized trials comparing gefitinib with chemotherapy as first-line treatment in patients with EGFR mutated advanced NSCLC support gefitinib as a new, highly effective treatment option in this setting. However, its use in clinical practice has several relevant implications and open issues. In order to choose the best treatment, a molecular characterization is now mandatory, as part of baseline diagnostic procedures. Every effort should be made in order to obtain sufficient tissue. If a clinical enrichment has to be performed for selecting patients to test for EGFR mutation, a reasonable proposal is to test all non-squamous tumors, and patients with squamous tumors only if never smokers. In patients with EGFR mutated tumor, one major issue is the decision about immediate use of gefitinib as first-line, or after failure of standard chemotherapy. First-line gefitinib, compared to chemotherapy, is associated with longer progression-free survival, higher response rate, better toxicity profile and quality of life, and its administration as first-line warrants that all patients have the chance of receiving an EGFR inhibitor. Evidence about the efficacy of erlotinib in the same setting will be soon available, however, at the moment, there are no direct comparisons between gefitinib and erlotinib in EGFR mutated patients. Treatment with gefitinib is usually well tolerated. Typical side effects in most cases are of mild to moderate intensity, and usually manageable with temporary interruption of treatment. When indicated gefitinib appears feasible also in special populations, like elderly or unfit patients, characterized by a significantly poorer risk/benefit ratio with standard chemotherapy. Personalized medicine for patients with lung cancer is now a reality, and patients with EGFR mutation should be treated with first-line EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor.

Abstract P6-11-10: Full-Oral, Metronomic Schedule of Vinorelbine (VNB) and Capecitabine (CAPE) in Locally Advanced or Metastatic Breast Cancer (BC) Patients (Pts): A Single Institution, Dose-Finding Study

BACKGROUND: Choice of chemotherapy is a major problem in locally advanced (LABC) or metastatic BC pts already treated with anthracyclines and taxanes, or not suitable for these drugs. VNB and CAPE are two valid options, both tested as single agents or in combination in this setting of pts. Different studies have demonstrated that the metronomic treatment could achieve a significant rate of clinical response with an acceptable toxicity profile. Based on the results of metronomic Phase I/II trial, which fixed the dose of VNB at 60 mg/tot thrice a week and considering that the two drugs have a different safety profile, we designed a dose-finding study, aiming to determine the optimal dose of oral VNB in combination with CAPE, both administered in a metronomic way. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fixed dose of CAPE was 500 mg thrice a day, continuously. Level I dose of VNB was 20 mg/tot, three times a week for 3 weeks (1 cycle); subsequent cohorts started with 30 mg/tot Level II), 40 mg/tot (Level III) and 50 mg/tot (Level IV), respectively, if no Grade 3-4 toxicity was observed in the same dose level of the previous cohort.

Results: Twelve consecutive pts were enrolled. Median age was 67.5 years (49-81), 4 pts were LABC or metastatic at diagnosis, HR status was positive in 11/12 pts (91.6%), 2 pts were HER2+ but could not or no longer receive antiHER2 agents due to cardiac failure. All pts but 2 (83.3%) received anthracyclines, taxanes or both. Mean number of metastatic sites was 3 (1-5). At the 50 mg level of dose, 1 pt developed G3 neurological toxicity during the 3rd week of cycle 1 and 1 pt G4 neutropenia in the 2nd week of cycle 2. No pts treated with the 40 mg level of dose experienced G3 toxicity. The Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD) was fixed at 40 mg thrice a week.

CONCLUSION: MTD of metronomic full-oral schedule of VNB in combination with fixed dose of CAPE was 40 mg thrice a week and was the recommended dose for the further ongoing Phase II study.

Citation Information: Cancer Res 2010;70(24 Suppl):Abstract nr P6-11-10.

Pemetrexed plus carboplatin in elderly patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma: combined analysis of two phase II trials

The incidence of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) in elderly patients is increasing. In this study, pooled data from two phase II trials of pemetrexed and carboplatin (PC) as first-line therapy were retrospectively analysed for comparisons between age groups. Patients received pemetrexed 500 mg m(-2) and carboplatin AUC 5 mg ml(-1) min(-1) intravenously every 21 days with standard vitamin supplementation. Elderly patients were defined as those >or=70 years old. A total of 178 patients with an ECOG performance status of or=70 years (27%). Grade 3-4 haematological toxicity was slightly worse in >or=70 vs <70-year-old patients, with neutropenia observed in 25.0 vs 13.8% (P=0.11), anaemia in 20.8 vs 6.9% (P=0.01) and thrombocytopenia in 14.6 vs 8.5% (P=0.26). Non-haematological toxicity was mild and similar in the two groups. No significant difference was observed in terms of overall disease control (60.4 vs 66.9%, P=0.47), time to progression (7.2 vs 7.5 months, P=0.42) and survival (10.7 vs 13.9 months, P=0.12). Apart from slightly worse haematological toxicity, there was no significant difference in outcome or toxicity between age groups. The PC regimen is effective and well tolerated in selected elderly patients with MPM.

Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFr) status detection in correlation to objective response on cetuximab-based therapy in patients (pts) with advanced colorectal cancer (ACC)

21070

Background: In current clinical practice Cetuximab represents a standard therapy for Irinotecan resistant pts with ACC, where EGFR-immunohistochemistry (IHC) evaluation is positive. In absence of reliable molecular predictors of the clinical benefit to anti-EGFR therapy, we have studied EGFR protein expression and gene status in order to correlate them to the clinical response. Methods: We investigated 40 primary colorectal carcinoma specimens. EGFR-protein expression was evaluated by Immunohistochemistry (IHC) using PharmDX-Kit DAKO Cytomation. IHC evaluation was performed using combined score based on the sum of percentage of positive cells and the staining of each sample. We identified three EGFR-score categories: 0–2, 3–5, 6–7 corresponding to low, intermediate and high expression respectively. EGFR-genetic status was conducted by Dual-Colour FISH (LSI EGFR-probe Vysis Inc).Gene and chromosome 7 copy numbers were identified by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH-LSI EGFR-Dual-colour-probe Vysis-Inc) as follows: tumor samples had a high EGFR-gene copy number if there was high polysomy ( 4-copies 40% of cells) or gene amplification (gene-clusters, gene/chromosome ratio per cell of 2, 15 copies of EGFR/ cell in 10% of cells) . The analysis of clinical data from all patients treated with Cetuximab (400–250mg/m2/w) and Irinotecan (300mg/m2/d1q21) was then performed. Results: EGFR-(IHC) high score was observed in 7pts from which only 2 had an objective response (OR). Intermediate (13pts) with 3 OR, low (12pts) with 1 OR and negative (8pts) with 2OR. Main FISH patterns were: high polisomy/amplification in 8pts with no response on cetuximab therapy. Low polisomy described in 19pts with 3 cases of disease remission. Disomy in 13pts with 5OR. No relationship was detected between IHC-score evaluation and FISH pattern. The clinical benefit (OR+stable disease =6months) was 65% in score-group 0–2; whereas 46% and 57% in groups 3–5/6–7 respectively, without statistical significance. Conclusion: According to our experience, IHC and FISH are unable to provide adequate selection criteria for the patients with different EGFR-status expression, who can benefit from Cetuximab therapy.

No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Randomized phase II three-arm trial with three platinum-based doublets in metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer. An Italian Trials in Medical Oncology study

BACKGROUND

Many patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) do not tolerate cisplatin-based regimens because of its nonhemathological toxicity.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We evaluated the response rate safety of new platinum analogue regimens, randomizing 147 patients with nonoperable IIIB/IV NSCLC to (i) carboplatin (area under the curve = 5 mg min/ml) on day 1 plus gemcitabine (GEM) (1000 mg/m(2)) on days 1 and 8 for six cycles; (ii) same regimen for three cycles followed by docetaxel (Taxotere) (40 mg/m(2)) on days 1 and 8 plus GEM (1250 mg/m(2)) on days 1 and 8 for three cycles; (iii) oxaliplatin (130 mg/m(2)) on day 1 plus GEM (1250 mg/m(2)) on days 1 and 8 for six cycles.

RESULTS

Intention-to-treat objective response rates were 25%, 25% and 30.6% in arms A, B and C, respectively. Median survival was 11.9, 9.2 and 11.3 months in arms A, B and C, respectively. Grade 3/4 neutropenia/anemia occurred in 29%/12.5%, 10%/16.5% and 8%/6% of arms A, B and C, respectively; grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia in 20.5%, 16.5% and 6%; grade 1/2 neurological toxicity in 43% of arm C.

CONCLUSIONS

Oxaliplatin/GEM (arm C) had similar activity to carboplatin/GEM (arm A), but milder hematological toxicity and may be worth testing in a phase III study against carboplatin/GEM in patients not suitable for cisplatin. The sequential regimen gave no additional benefit.

Preclinical and clinical evaluation of four gemcitabine plus carboplatin schedules as front-line treatment for stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

To explore the activity and tolerability of gemcitabine (GEM) and carboplatin (CBDCA) in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) we tested four administration sequences on H460 NSCLC cells, and at the same time performed a randomized phase II trial using analogous schedules.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

GEM was given first in two in vitro sequences, and CBDCA first in the other two; interaction was quantified calculating a combination index. Eighty-eight chemotherapy-naïve, stage IV NSCLC patients were randomly assigned to receive either: GEM (1000 mg/m(2)) on days 1 and 8 and CBDCA (AUC 5 mg.min/ml) on day 1, 4 h before GEM (arm A); same as arm A except CBDCA given 4 h after GEM (arm B); GEM on days 1 and 8 and CBDCA on day 2 (arm C); GEM on days 2 and 9 and CBDCA on day 1 (arm D). Courses were repeated every 21 days.

RESULTS

In the preclinical study, CBDCA given before GEM produced a synergistic cytotoxic effect. Two complete and 29 partial responses occurred in 86 of 88 treated patients (intention-to-treat analysis 35%; 95% confidence interval 25.5% to 46.8%). One- and 2-year survivals were 44% and 11%, respectively. Grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia occurred in 11%; grade 3/4 neutropenia in 17%; and non-hematological toxicity was insignificant. Median survival was 11 months (range 7-18+), but better in patients receiving CBDCA first (arms A and D) (13 versus 9 months) than in patients receiving GEM first (arms B and C). The response was greater (50% versus 31%) in arm A than in the other arms.

CONCLUSIONS

The CBDCA/GEM combination is safe and active against stage IV NSCLC. Our preclinical and clinical findings suggest that administration of CBDCA before GEM gives the better outcome.