Continuous immunotherapy beyond progression in clinical practice for small cell lung cancer

In non-small-cell lung cancer, continuous immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) beyond progression are often used in clinical practice. On the other hand, there is almost no data on whether the concept of continuous ICIs beyond progression can be adopted in small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). We describe the effectiveness of continuous ICIs beyond progression in SCLC. Medical courses of SCLC patients treated with chemo-immunotherapy were retrospectively reviewed at our hospital. The study included 36 patients with a median age of 73 years (range 46-83 years) who introduced chemo-immunotherapy between September 2019 and December 2022. Atezolizumab and durvalumab in combination with platinum plus etoposide were administered in 24 and 12 patients, respectively. The overall response rate was 67% and the disease control rate was 86%. The median progression-free survival and time to treatment failure (TTF) were 5.1 and 10.3 months, respectively. The median cycle of ICIs was 5 (range 1-42). The median overall survival was 13.6 months. ICIs were administered beyond progression in 14 (39%) patients: five were treated again with chemo-immunotherapy and local ablative radiotherapy, four with local ablative radiotherapy and continuous ICIs, three with chemo-immunotherapy, and two with continuous ICIs alone. TTF exceeded 12 months in 12 (86%) of the 14 cases, six of which were still on ICIs. Adverse events ≥grade 3 were observed in 21 (58%) patients. A notable TTF suggested a benefit of continuous ICIs beyond progression. The concept could be suitably adopted and provide a favorable prognosis in selected cases of SCLC that were previously regarded as an aggressive malignancy.

Dabrafenib-Trametinib and Radiotherapy for Oligoprogressive BRAF Mutant Advanced Melanoma

The clinical management of metastatic melanoma has been changed by BRAF (BRAFi) and MEK inhibitors (MEKi), which represent a standard treatment for BRAF-mutant melanoma. In oligoprogressive melanoma patients with BRAF mutations, target therapy can be combined with loco-regional radiotherapy (RT). However, the association of BRAF/MEK inhibitors and RT needs to be carefully monitored for potential increased toxicity. Despite the availability of some reports regarding the tolerability of RT + target therapy, data on simultaneous RT and BRAFi/MEKi are limited and mostly focused on the BRAFi vemurafenib. Here, we report a series of metastatic melanoma patients who received fractioned RT regimens for oligoprogressive disease in combination with the BRAFi dabrafenib and the MEKi trametinib, which have continued beyond progression. None of the cases developed relevant adverse events while receiving RT or interrupted dabrafenib and trametinib administration. These cases suggest that a long period of dabrafenib/trametinib interruption during radiotherapy for oligoprogressive disease can be avoided. Prospective trials are warranted to assess the efficacy and safety of the contemporary administration of BRAF/MEK inhibitors and radiotherapy for oligoprogressive disease.

A multicenter single-arm Phase II clinical trial of second-line FOLFIRI plus panitumumab after first-line treatment with FOLFOX plus panitumumab for initial RAS wild-type colorectal cancer with evaluation of circulating tumor DNA: A protocol study

The efficacy and safety of the continuous use of panitumumab in first- and second-line treatments for colorectal cancer (CRC) have yet to be determined. Liquid biopsy of circulating tumor DNA is capable of assessing the gene mutation status at several time-points, and could predict the efficacy of ongoing panitumumab treatment. To address these two points, a multicenter single-arm Phase II clinical trial will be conducted by evaluating the effect of FOLFIRI with panitumumab as second-line chemotherapy in patients with CRC, after failure or intolerance of first-line treatment with FOLFOX with panitumumab. The primary endpoint is the 6-month progression-free survival rate. Gene mutation status using circulating tumor DNA will be assessed at multiple time-points during the study period as one of the secondary endpoints. The observed 6-month PFS rate will be compared with the threshold 6-month PFS rate of 35% with a one-sided significance level of 10% using the binomial exact test. The target number of cases in this study is 55 patients. The study protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the Epidemiological and Clinical Research Information Network (17-0601-1) and will be conducted after approval by the Institutional Review Board of each participating institute. This study is registered in UMIN (UMIN000026817, March 31, 2017). The results of the present study will be presented at related international congresses, and will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals.

Real world study of the continuation of bevacizumab beyond disease progression after first-line treatment containing bevacizumab in Chinese patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer

Background

Bevacizumab (Bev) plus platinum‐based chemotherapy is a standard first‐line treatment option for advanced non‐squamous non‐small cell lung cancer (NS‐NSCLC). We evaluated the efficacy and safety of continuing Bev in Chinese patients with advanced NS‐NSCLC progression after first‐line treatment containing Bev in a real‐world setting.

Methods

The data of 118 patients with advanced NS‐NSCLC who received Bev between July 2009 and July 2017 were retrospectively collected. The patients were divided into groups: 15 in Bev first‐line, 82 in Bev ≥ second‐line, and 21 in Bev cross‐lines. The primary endpoint was overall survival; secondary objectives were progression‐free survival, objective response rate, disease control rate, and safety.

Results

The overall survival was 21.8, 32.5, and 18.9 months (P = 0.092) in the overall population and 39.3, 25.8, and 15.0 months (P = 0.347) in the wild‐type population in the Bev first‐line, Bev ≥ second‐line, and Bev cross‐lines groups, respectively. There were no significant differences in progression‐free survival of second‐line treatment between the groups in the overall population: 2.6, 3.7, and 3.2 months in the Bev first‐line, Bev ≥ second‐line, and Bev cross‐lines groups, respectively (P = 0.796). No statistically significant improvement in objective response or disease control rates in the Bev cross‐lines group was observed. No unexpected or severe adverse events were recorded.

Conclusion

We found no benefit in continuing Bev treatment beyond progression after first‐line treatment containing Bev for patients with advanced NS‐NSCLC. Further research of validated predictive biomarkers of response to treatment after long‐term antiangiogenic therapy is required.

The role of stereotactic body radiation therapy in oligometastatic colorectal cancer: Clinical case report of a long-responder patient treated with regorafenib beyond progression

RATIONALE

Regorafenib is the new standard third-line therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, the reported 1-year overall survival rate does not exceed 25%.

PATIENT CONCERNS

A 55-year-old man affected by mCRC, treated with regorafenib combined with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), showing a durable response.

INTERVENTIONS

After 6 months of regorafenib, a PET/CT scan revealed a focal uptake in a solid lung nodule which was treated with SBRT, whereas continuing regorafenib administration. Fourteen months later, the patient had further progression in a parasternal lymph node, but treatment with regorafenib was continued. The regorafenib-associated side effects, such us the hand-foot syndrome, were favorable managed by reducing the dose from 160 to 120 mg/day.

OUTCOMES

Patient-reported outcome was characterized by a progression-free survival of approximately 3 years.

LESSONS

in presence of oligometastatic progression, a local SBRT while retaining the same systemic therapy may be a better multidisciplinary approach. Moreover, disease progression is no longer an absolute contraindication for continuing the regorafenib treatment.

Trastuzumab beyond progression in patients with HER2-positive advanced gastric adenocarcinoma: a multicenter AGEO study

INTRODUCTION

Trastuzumab in combination with platinum-based chemotherapy is the standard first-line regimen in HER2-positive advanced gastric cancer. However, there are very few data concerning efficacy of continuing trastuzumab beyond first-line progression.

METHODS

This retrospective multicenter study included all consecutive patients with HER2-positive advanced gastric or gastro-esophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma who received a second-line of chemotherapy with or without trastuzumab after progression on platinum-based chemotherapy plus trastuzumab. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated from the start of second-line chemotherapy using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using log-rank test. The prognostic variables with P values ≤ 0.05 in univariate analysis were eligible for the Cox multivariable regression model.

RESULTS

From May 2010 to December 2015, 104 patients were included (median age, 60.8 years; male, 78.8%; ECOG performance status [PS] 0-1, 71.2%). The continuation (n=39) versus discontinuation (n=65) of trastuzumab beyond progression was significantly associated with an improvement of median PFS (4.4 versus 2.3 months; P=0.002) and OS (12.6 versus 6.1 months; P=0.001. In the multivariate analysis including the ECOG PS, number of metastatic sites and measurable disease, the continuation of trastuzumab beyond progression remained significantly associated with longer PFS (HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.35-0.89; P=0.01) and OS (HR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.28-0.79; P=0.004).

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that continuation of trastuzumab beyond progression has clinical benefit in patients with HER2-positive advanced gastric cancer. These results deserve a prospective randomized validation.

Factors Associated with Post-Progression Survival in Patients with Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treated with Sorafenib

Sorafenib exerts modest antitumor activity in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and radiological progressive disease (rPD) does not always correspond to so-called clinical progressive disease (cPD). We evaluated 101 patients who initiated sorafenib treatment for HCC and assessed post-progression survival (PPS) using the Cox proportional hazards model. PPS was calculated from the date of the first rPD until the date of death or the last follow-up. Using Cox model analysis of the 76 patients who experienced first rPD, we identified the Child-Pugh class, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, the best antitumor response during treatment (using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) Version 1.1) and α-fetoprotein levels as independent factors affecting PPS. When these factors were used to define scores ranging from zero to five with a cutoff value of two, PPS of patients who received best supportive care (BSC) after rPD was not statistically significantly different from that of patients who received post-rPD therapy with scores ≥2 (p = 0.220). In contrast, the PPS for the post-rPD therapy group was significantly longer compared with the BSC patients with scores <2 (p < 0.001). Patients who scored ≥2 at their first rPD were judged cPD and as candidates for BSC.

Continuation or reintroduction of bevacizumab beyond progression to first-line therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer: final results of the randomized BEBYP trial

BACKGROUND

The combination of bevacizumab with fluorouracil-based chemotherapy is a standard first-line treatment option in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We studied the efficacy of continuing or reintroducing bevacizumab in combination with second-line chemotherapy after progression to bevacizumab-based first-line therapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this phase III study, patients with mCRC treated with fluoropyrimidine-based first-line chemotherapy plus bevacizumab were randomized to receive in second-line mFOLFOX-6 or FOLFIRI (depending on first-line regimen) with or without bevacizumab. The primary end point was progression-free survival. To detect a hazard ratio (HR) for progression of 0.70 with an α and β error of 0.05 and 0.20, respectively, 262 patients were required.

RESULTS

In consideration of the results of the ML18147 trial, the study was prematurely stopped. Between April 2008 and May 2012, a total of 185 patients were randomized. Bevacizumab-free interval was longer than 3 months in 43% of patients in chemotherapy alone arm and in 50% of patients in the bevacizumab arm. At a median follow-up of 45.3 months, the median progression-free survival was 5.0 months in the chemotherapy group and 6.8 months in the bevacizumab group [adjusted HR = 0.70; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.52-0.95; stratified log-rank P = 0.010]. Subgroup analyses showed a consistent benefit in all subgroups analyzed and in particular in patients who had continued or reintroduced bevacizumab. An improved overall survival was also observed in the bevacizumab arm (adjusted HR = 0.77; 95% CI 0.56-1.06; stratified log-rank P = 0.043). Responses (RECIST 1.0) were similar in the chemotherapy and bevacizumab groups (17% and 21%; P = 0.573). Toxicity profile was consistent with previously reported data.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that the continuation or the reintroduction of bevacizumab with second-line chemotherapy beyond first progression improves the outcome and supports the use of this strategy in the treatment of mCRC. ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT00720512.

FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab 5 mg/kg versus 10 mg/kg as second-line therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who have failed first-line bevacizumab plus oxaliplatin-based therapy: a randomized phase III study (EAGLE Study)

We planned a multicenter randomized phase III study to evaluate the efficacy of appropriate dose of bevacizumab (5 or 10 mg/kg) with FOLFIRI in patients with advanced/metastatic colorectal cancer who have failed prior bevacizumab plus oxaliplatin-based therapy. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival. The secondary endpoints are the toxicity, response rate, time to treatment failure, overall survival, overall survival from the start of the first-line treatment and second progression-free survival (time duration from the initiation of the first-line treatment until progression after the protocol treatment). A total of 370 patients were considered to be appropriate for this trial.