Who Progresses to Third-Line Therapies for Overactive Bladder? Trends From the AQUA Registry

INTRODUCTION

Overactive bladder (OAB) patients who do not achieve satisfactory results with second-line OAB medications should be offered third-line therapies (percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation, sacral neuromodulation, onabotulinumtoxinA bladder injection [BTX-A]). We aimed to determine which clinical factors affect progression from second- to third-line OAB therapy.

METHODS

Between 2014 and 2020, the AUA Quality Registry was queried for adult patients with idiopathic OAB. For the primary outcome, patient and provider factors associated with increased odds of progression from second- to third-line therapy were assessed. Secondary outcomes included median time for progression to third-line therapy and third-line therapy utilization across subgroups.

RESULTS

A total of 641,122 patients met inclusion criteria and were included in analysis. Of these, only 7487 (1.2%) received third-line therapy after receiving second-line therapy. On multivariate analysis, patients aged 65 to 79, women, White race, history of dual anticholinergic and β3 agonist therapy, metropolitan area, government insurance, and single specialty practice had the greatest odds of progressing to third-line therapy. Black and Asian race, male gender, and rural setting had lower odds of progressing to third-line therapy. BTX-A was the most common therapy overall (40% BTX-A, 32% sacral neuromodulation, 28% percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation). The median time of progression from second- to third-line therapy was 15.4 months (IQR 5.9, 32.4). Patients < 50 years old and women progressed fastest to third-line therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Very few patients received third-line therapies, and the time to progression from second- to third-line therapies is > 1 year. The study findings highlight a potential need to improve third-line therapy implementation.

Retrospective Correlation between First Drug Treatment Duration and Survival Outcomes in Sequential Treatment with Regorafenib and Trifluridine/Tipiracil in Refractory Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Real-World Subgroup Analysis

Background: Patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) rarely receive third-line or further treatment. In this context, regorafenib (R) and trifluridine/tipiracil (T) are two important novel therapeutic choices with statistically significant increases in overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and disease control, with different toxicity profiles. This study is a subgroup analysis of our larger retrospective study, already published, whose objective was to assess the outcomes of patients when R and T were given sequentially. Patients and Methods: The study involved thirteen Italian cancer centers on a 10-year retrospective observation (2012-2022). In this subgroup analysis, we focused our attention on the correlation between the first drug treatment duration (<3 months, 3 to <6 months and ≥6 months) and survival outcomes in patients who had received the sequence regorafenib-to-trifluridine/tipiracil, or vice versa. Results: The initial study included 866 patients with mCRC who received sequential T/R, or R/T, or T or R alone. This analysis is focused on evaluating the impact of the duration of the first treatment in the sequence on clinical outcomes (OS, PFS) and includes 146 and 116 patients of the T/R and R/T sequences, respectively. Based on the duration of the first drug treatment, subgroups for the T/R sequence included 27 patients (18.4%) who received T for <3 months, 86 (58.9%) treated for 3 to <6 months, and 33 (22.6%) treated for ≥6 months; in the reverse sequence (R as the first drug), subgroups included 18 patients (15.5%) who received their first treatment for <3 months, 62 (53.4%) treated for 3 to <6 months, and 35 (31.0%) treated for ≥6 months. In patients who received their first drug treatment for a period of 3 to <6 months, the R/T sequence had a significantly longer median OS (13.7 vs. 10.8 months, p = 0.0069) and a longer median PFS (10.8 vs. 8.5 months, p = 0.0003) than the T/R group. There were no statistically significant differences between groups with first drug treatment durations of <3 months and ≥6 months. Conclusions: Our analysis seems to suggest that the administration of R for a period of 3 to <6 months before that of T can prolong both OS and PFS, as compared to the opposite sequence.

Efficacy and safety of fruquintinib dose-escalation strategy for elderly patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer: A single-arm, multicenter, phase II study

BACKGROUND

Fruquintinib has demonstrated significant improvement in overall survival (OS) among previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. However, the utilization of fruquintinib has been constrained by various toxicities, such as hand-foot skin reaction (HFSR) and hypertension, particularly in elderly patients with reduced tolerance to the standard dosage. This study aims to investigate the efficacy and safety of fruquintinib dose-escalation strategy for elderly refractory mCRC patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This open-label, single-arm, phase II trial included patients aged 65 years or over with mCRC who had progressed after two or more lines of chemotherapy. Fruquintinib was administered for 21 consecutive days of a 28-day treatment cycle. The starting dose of fruquintinib was 3 mg/day and escalated to 4 mg/day in Week 2 and 5 mg/day in Week 3 if no significant drug-related toxicity was observed. The highest tolerated dose from Cycle 1 would be administered in Cycle 2 and all subsequent cycles. Before commencing treatment, all enrolled patients underwent a G8 questionnaire and comprehensive geriatric assessments. The primary endpoint of the study was progression-free survival (PFS).

RESULTS

A total of 29 patients were enrolled and all started fruquintinib at 3 mg/day. Fifteen patients (51.7%) were subsequently escalated to 4 mg/day and 4 (13.8%) to 5 mg/day. Only four (13.8%) patients discontinued treatment due to adverse events (AEs). The median PFS was 3.8 months (95% CI, 2.7-4.9), and the median OS was 7.6 months (95% CI, 6.5-8.7). Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were observed in all 29 patients (100%). The most frequently occurring (>10%) TRAEs greater than Grade 3 were HFSR (20.7%), hypertension (20.7%), and diarrhea (10.3%).

CONCLUSION

Our study indicated that a dose of 4 mg/day was well tolerated by most elderly patients, suggesting that fruquintinib dose-escalation strategy during the first cycle could serve as a viable alternative to the standard 5 mg/day dosing.

Efficacy and safety of abemaciclib alone and with PI3K/mTOR inhibitor LY3023414 or galunisertib versus chemotherapy in previously treated metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas (PDAC) are characterized by frequent cell cycle pathways aberrations. This study evaluated safety and efficacy of abemaciclib, a cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitor, as monotherapy or in combination with PI3K/mTOR dual inhibitor LY3023414 or TGFβ inhibitor galunisertib versus standard of care (SOC) chemotherapy in patients with pretreated metastatic PDAC.

METHODS

This Phase 2 open-label study enrolled patients with metastatic PDAC who progressed after 1-2 prior therapies. Patients were enrolled in a safety lead-in (abemaciclib plus galunisertib) followed by a 2-stage randomized design. Stage 1 randomization was planned 1:1:1:1 for abemaciclib, abemaciclib plus LY3023414, abemaciclib plus galunisertib, or SOC gemcitabine or capecitabine. Advancing to Stage 2 required a disease control rate (DCR) difference ≥0 in abemaciclib-containing arms versus SOC. Primary objectives for Stages 1 and 2 were DCR and progression-free survival (PFS), respectively. Secondary objectives included response rate, overall survival, safety, and pharmacokinetics.

RESULTS

One hundred and six patients were enrolled. Abemaciclib plus galunisertib did not advance to Stage 1 for reasons unrelated to safety or efficacy. Stage 1 DCR was 15.2% with abemaciclib monotherapy, 12.1% with abemaciclib plus LY3023414, and 36.4% with SOC. Median PFS was 1.7 months (95% CI: 1.4-1.8), 1.8 months (95% CI: 1.3-1.9), and 3.3 months (95% CI: 1.1-5.7), respectively. No arms advanced to Stage 2. No new safety signals were identified.

CONCLUSION

In patients with pretreated metastatic PDAC, abemaciclib-based therapy did not improve DCRs or PFS compared with SOC chemotherapy. No treatment arms advanced to Stage 2. Abemaciclib remains investigational in patients with PDAC.

Third-line treatment patterns and clinical outcomes for metastatic colorectal cancer: a retrospective real-world study

Background

There are multiple recommendations on the third-line therapy of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC); however, no consensus has been reached.

Objectives

This study aimed to explore the patient demographics and the real-world third-line treatment landscape of mCRC.

Design

A retrospective real-world cohort study.

Methods

Electronic medical records of mCRC patients from Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital between 2013 and 2020 were collected. Upon descriptive, comparative, and survival analyses, a retrospective study was conducted to describe demographics and clinical outcomes of mCRC patients receiving third-line treatment.

Results

Among 218 mCRC patients receiving third-line therapy, 65.5% received chemotherapy combined with or without targeted drugs, followed by anti-angiogenic monotherapy (18.4%), anti-epidermal growth factor receptor drugs (6.9%) and immunotherapy (6.4%). The overall response rate and disease control rate reached 10.2% and 59.2%, respectively; and median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival were 4.0 m and 10.7 m, respectively. After Cox multivariate analysis, we found that therapeutic regime was an independent prognostic factor. Compared to patients receiving anti-angiogenic monotherapy, those receiving chemotherapy combined with or without targeted drugs exhibited better prognosis. For patients whose PFS were longer in the front-line treatment, the PFS of third-line therapy was also relatively longer (p = 0.023). Multiple types of therapies (>3, p = 0.002) or multiple drugs (>5, p = 0.024) in the whole-course management of mCRC are indicators of longer survival.

Conclusion

Chemotherapy combined with or without targeted therapy remained dominated third-line choice and showed favorable efficacy compared with anti-angiogenic monotherapy. With the application of more types and quantities of effective drugs, patients would achieve better survival.

Treatment Settings and Outcomes with Regorafenib and Trifluridine/Tipiracil at Third-Line Treatment and beyond in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Real-World Multicenter Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND

Patients with refractory mCRC rarely undergo third-line or subsequent treatment. This strategy could negatively impact their survival. In this setting, regorafenib (R) and trifluridine/tipiracil (T) are two key new treatment options with statistically significant improvements in overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and disease control with different tolerance profiles. This study aimed to retrospectively evaluate the efficacy and safety profiles of these agents in real-world practice.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In 2012-2022, 866 patients diagnosed with mCRC who received sequential R and T (T/R, n = 146; R/T, n = 116]) or T (n = 325]) or R (n = 279) only were retrospectively recruited from 13 Italian cancer institutes.

RESULTS

The median OS is significantly longer in the R/T group (15.9 months) than in the T/R group (13.9 months) (p = 0.0194). The R/T sequence had a statistically significant advantage in the mPFS, which was 8.8 months with T/R vs. 11.2 months with R/T (p = 0.0005). We did not find significant differences in outcomes between groups receiving T or R only. A total of 582 grade 3/4 toxicities were recorded. The frequency of grade 3/4 hand-foot skin reactions was higher in the R/T sequence compared to the reverse sequence (37.3% vs. 7.4%) (p = 0.01), while grade 3/4 neutropenia was slightly lower in the R/T group than in the T/R group (66.2% vs. 78.2%) (p = 0.13). Toxicities in the non-sequential groups were similar and in line with previous studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The R/T sequence resulted in a significantly longer OS and PFS and improved disease control compared with the reverse sequence. R and T given not sequentially have similar impacts on survival. More data are needed to define the best sequence and to explore the efficacy of sequential (T/R or R/T) treatment combined with molecular-targeted drugs.

Efficacy of third-line anti-EGFR-based treatment versus regorafenib or trifluridine/tipiracil according to primary tumor site in RAS/BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer patients

Background

Right- (R) and left-sided (L) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) exhibit different clinical and molecular features. Several retrospective analyses showed that survival benefit of anti-EGFR-based therapy is limited to RAS/BRAF wt L-sided mCRC patients. Few data are available about third-line anti-EGFR efficacy according to primary tumor site.

Methods

RAS/BRAF wt patients mCRC treated with third-line anti-EGFR-based therapy versus regorafenib or trifluridine/tipiracil (R/T) were retrospectively collected. The objective of the analysis was to compare treatment efficacy according to tumor site. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), response rate (RR) and toxicity.

Results

A total of 76 RAS/BRAF wt mCRC patients, treated with third-line anti-EGFR-based therapy or R/T, were enrolled. Of those, 19 (25%) patients had a R-sided tumor (9 patients received anti-EGFR treatment and 10 patients R/T) and 57 (75%) patients had a L-sided tumor (30 patients received anti-EGFR treatment and 27 patients R/T). A significant PFS [7.2 vs 3.6 months, HR 0.43 (95% CI 0.2-0.76), p= 0.004] and OS benefit [14.9 vs 10.9 months, HR 0.52 (95% CI 0.28-0.98), p= 0.045] in favor of anti-EGFR therapy vs R/T was observed in the L-sided tumor group. No difference in PFS and OS was observed in the R-sided tumor group. A significant interaction according to primary tumor site and third-line regimen was observed for PFS (p= 0.05). RR was significantly higher in L-sided patients treated with anti-EGFR vs R/T (43% vs. 0%; p <0.0001), no difference was observed in R-sided patients. At the multivariate analysis, third-line regimen was independently associated with PFS in L-sided patients.

Conclusions

Our results demonstrated a different benefit from third-line anti-EGFR-based therapy according to primary tumor site, confirming the role of L-sided tumor in predicting benefit from third-line anti-EGFR vs R/T. At the same time, no difference was observed in R-sided tumor.

Real-world overall survival of patients receiving cetuximab in later lines of treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer

Aim: To examine characteristics of and treatment duration and real-world overall survival (rwOS) in patients receiving cetuximab as second-line (2L) or third-line (3L) treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer. Materials & methods: This was a retrospective study of 1096 and 684 patients in 2L and 3L cohorts, respectively. Results: The most common cetuximab-based regimens were cetuximab + folinic acid, fluorouracil and irinotecan (2L: 44%; 3L: 32%) and cetuximab + irinotecan (2L: 28%; 3L: 35%). Kaplan-Meier survival estimates and stepwise Cox regression model analysis demonstrated median treatment duration and rwOS of 3.7 and 14.4 months, respectively, in patients receiving treatment in the 2L cohort. In the 3L cohort, treatment duration was 3.3 months and rwOS was 12.0 months. Conclusion: This large real-world study provides evidence of rwOS in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer receiving cetuximab-based regimens as 2L or 3L treatment.

Chronic Myeloid Leukemia: Part II-Cost of Care Among Patients in Advanced Phases or Later Lines of Therapy in Chronic Phase in the United States from a Commercial Perspective

Background: Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are the standard-of-care treatment for chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase (CML-CP). Despite advances in therapy, there remains a proportion of patients with CML-CP that are refractory/intolerant to TKIs, and these patients cycle through multiple lines of therapy. Moreover, even with TKIs, some patients progress to accelerated phase/blast crisis (AP/BC), which is associated with particularly poor clinical outcomes. Objectives: To describe real-world treatment patterns, healthcare resource utilization (HRU), and costs of patients with CML-CP reaching later lines of therapy or progressing to AP/BC in the United States. Methods: Adult CML patients from administrative claims data (January 1, 2000-June 30, 2019) were classified by health state: on third-line (CML-CP On Treatment), on fourth or later lines (CML-CP Post-Discontinuation), or progressed to AP/BC (CML-AP/BC). Outcomes were assessed by health state. Results: There were 296 (4620 patient-months), 83 (1644 patient-months), and 949 (25 593 patient-months) patients classified in the CML-CP On Treatment, CML-CP Post-Discontinuation, and CML-AP/BC cohorts, respectively. Second-generation TKIs (nilotinib, dasatinib, and bosutinib) were most commonly used in the CML-CP On Treatment (69.1% of patient-months) and CML-CP Post-Discontinuation cohorts (59.1% of patient-months). Three-month outpatient incidence rates (IRs) were 7.6, 8.3, and 7.0 visits in the CML-CP On Treatment, CML-CP Post-Discontinuation, and CML-AP/BC cohort, respectively, with mean costs of $597 per service. Three-month inpatient IRs were 0.6, 0.7, and 1.4 days in the CML-CP On Treatment, CML-CP Post-Discontinuation, and CML-AP/BC cohort, respectively, with mean costs of $5892 per day. Mean hematopoietic stem cell transplantation cost was $352 333; mean 3-month terminal care cost was $107 013. Discussion: Cost of CML care is substantial among patients with CML reaching third-line, fourth or later lines, or progressing to AP/BC, suggesting that the disease is associated with a significant economic and clinical burden. From third-line to fourth or later lines, HRU was observed to increase, and the incidence of inpatient days was particularly high for those who progressed to AP/BC. Conclusion: In this study, patients with CML cycling through TKIs in later lines of therapy or progressing to AP/BC experienced substantial HRU and costs, suggesting unmet treatment needs.

Barriers and facilitators to overactive bladder therapy adherence

AIMS

To provide an overview of the barriers and facilitators to overactive bladder (OAB) therapy initiation and adherence.

METHODS

A PubMed and Embase literature search was conducted to identify barriers to OAB therapy adherence.

RESULTS

OAB therapy adherence is associated with improvements in urinary symptoms, and quality of life with reductions in annual costs for OAB-related expenditures. However, adherence rates to behavioral therapies are as low as 32% at 1 year, only 15%-40% of treated patients remain on oral medications at 1 year due to several factors (e.g., inadequate efficacy, tolerability, and cost), and 5%-10% of OAB patients progress to advanced therapies. While some common barriers to therapy adherence are often fixed (e.g., costs, lack of efficacy, time, side effects, treatment fatigue), many are modifiable (e.g., lack of knowledge, poor relationships, negative experiences, poor communication with providers). Patient-centered care may help address some modifiable barriers. Emerging data demonstrate that patient-centered care in the form of treatment navigators improves OAB therapy adherence and progression to advanced therapies in the appropriate patient.

CONCLUSIONS

There are numerous modifiable barriers to OAB therapy adherence. A patient-centered lens is needed to elicit patient goals, establish realistic treatment expectations, and tailor therapy to improve therapy adherence, optimize outcomes, and reduce healthcare expenditures. Further research is needed to develop and study low-cost, scalable solutions.

Immunotherapy for Refractory Autoimmune Encephalitis

Autoimmune encephalitis (AE) is an immune-mediated disease involving the central nervous system, usually caused by antigen-antibody reactions. With the advent of autoantibody-associated diseases, AE has become a hot research frontier in neuroimmunology. The first-line conventional treatments of autoimmune encephalitis consist of steroids, intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG), plasma exchange (PLEX), and second-line therapy includes rituximab. Despite considerable research and expanding clinical experience, current treatments are still ineffective for a significant number of patients. Although there is no clear consensus, clinical trial evidence limited, and the level of evidence for some of the drugs based on single reports, third-line therapy is a viable alternative for refractory encephalitis patients. With the current rapid research progress, a breakthrough in the treatment of AE is critical. This article aims to review the third-line therapy for refractory AE

Efficacy and safety of a novel anti-HER2 therapeutic antibody RC48 in patients with HER2-overexpressing, locally advanced or metastatic gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer: a single-arm phase II study

Background

Current treatment options for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)‐overexpressing gastric cancer at third‐line have shown limited clinical benefit. Further, there is no specific treatment for HER2 immunohistochemistry (IHC) 2+ and fluorescence in‐situ hybridization‐negative patients. Here, we report the efficacy and safety of a novel anti‐HER2 antibody RC48 for patients with HER2‐overexpressing, advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer.

Methods

Patients with HER2‐overexpressing (IHC 2+ or 3+), locally advanced or metastatic gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer who were under at least second‐line therapy were eligible and received RC48 2.5 mg/kg alone every 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate (ORR) assessed by an independent review committee. Secondary endpoints included progression‐free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), duration of response, time to progression, disease control rate, and safety.

Results

Of 179 patients screened, 125 were eligible and received RC48 treatment. The ORR was 24.8% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 17.5%‐33.3%). The median PFS and OS were 4.1 months (95% CI: 3.7‐4.9 months) and 7.9 months (95% CI: 6.7‐9.9 months), respectively. The most frequently reported adverse events were decreased white blood cell count (53.6%), asthenia (53.6%), hair loss (53.6%), decreased neutrophil count (52.0%), anemia (49.6%), and increased aspartate aminotransferase level (43.2%). Serious adverse events (SAEs) occurred in 45 (36.0%) patients, and RC48‐related SAEs were mainly decreased neutrophil count (3.2%). Seven patients had adverse events that led to death were not RC48‐related.

Conclusions

RC48 showed promising activity with manageable safety, suggesting potential application in patients with HER2‐overexpressing, advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer who have previously received at least two lines of chemotherapy.

A Bayesian network meta-analysis on systemic therapy for previously treated gastric cancer

We conducted a systemic literature review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to identify phase III RCTs on salvage treatment of advanced gastric cancer (AGC) and performed a Bayesian network meta-analysis with random-effects model. The overall survival (OS) was the primary outcome of interest. A total of 20 randomized phase III trials were selected. For the second-line treatment, olaparib plus paclitaxel had the highest surface under the cumulative ranking curve value (90.5%), followed by paclitaxel plus ramucirumab (88.4%) and pembrolizumab (86.5%), indicating that these treatments could be the most effective regimens in terms of OS. Nivolumab, chemotherapy, and apatinib showed significant OS benefit compared with best supportive care for the third-line treatment. In conclusion, pembrolizumab may be the most preferable regimen as a second-line treatment for patients with PD-L1-expressing AGC, while paclitaxel-based combinations are recommended for PD-L1-negative AGC. Nivolumab might be the most preferable third-line treatment.

Partial response of donafenib as the third-line therapy in metastatic colon cancer: A case report

RATIONALE

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a digestive tumor with high morbidity and mortality rates. After second-line treatment failure, third-line treatment options are limited, and the objective response rate is low. These patients are expected to have a short survival time. Therefore, it is very important to explore safer and more effective treatment options for patients with advanced colorectal cancer. Donafenib is a new type of tyrosine kinase inhibitor developed independently in China. Its effectiveness and safety as a first-line treatment for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in China have been verified.

PATIENT CONCERNS

The patient was a 60-year-old Asian man who presented with sudden lower abdominal pain, vomiting, anal exhaustion, and poor defecation, without an apparent cause. He had no history of type 2 diabetes, hypertension, or other relevant past illnesses.

DIAGNOSIS

Metastatic colon cancer (stage IV).

INTERVENTIONS

mFOLFOX6 chemotherapy was administered in 15 cycles as first-line therapy. FOLFIRI chemotherapy was administered in 8 cycles as second-line therapy. Donafenib was administered as third-line therapy.

OUTCOMES

The patient achieved partial response. No serious adverse events (grades III-IV) occurred.

LESSONS

This case report provides clinicians with a safe and effective option for donafenib as a later-line treatment option for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer to improve their overall survival and quality of life.

Gastric Cancer Harboring an ERBB3 Mutation Treated with a Pyrotinib-Irinotecan Combo: A Case Study

Gastric cancer is common, especially in East Asian countries, and is associated with high recurrence and mortality rates. Currently, there is no standard third-line treatment for metastatic gastric cancer. In this report, we present the case of a 69-year-old man with advanced gastric cancer, whose tumor was negative for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) according to immunohistochemical analysis. Next-generation sequencing performed on paraffin sections of the postoperative tumor samples indicated the presence of the ERBB3 V104L mutation. The patient received irinotecan plus pyrotinib as a third-line therapy and achieved a progression-free survival of 7.6 months with a high quality of life. Therefore, the combined administration of irinotecan and pyrotinib may improve the clinical condition of patients with gastric cancer harboring an ERBB3 mutation. Moreover, ERBB3 could be a potential therapeutic target for gastric cancer.

Third-line therapy in the epidermal growth factor receptor mutation-positive advanced nonsmall-cell lung cancer

Introduction:

The treatment of lung cancer is not defined in the third-line setting and remains an unanswered question. Erlotinib is the only drug approved in the third-line setting. With the introduction of effective first- and second-line therapies, more and more patients warrant an effective third-line therapy. We did a post hoc analysis of our randomized trial for the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-positive patients who received third-line therapy.

Materials and Methods:

The present series is of 85 patients who received third-line therapy. Demographic data were collected which included age, performance status, gender, stage, comorbidities, and sites of metastasis. Data were collected for the type of systemic treatment patients received and number of cycles received. Information related to the impact of treatment on the symptoms of patients and the imaging done for response evaluation was collected.

Results:

Of the 85 patients, there were 13 patients (15%) who achieved a partial response and 34 patients (40%) who had stable disease as best response. There were no complete response and 20 patients (24%) had disease progression at the time of first assessment. The median overall survival (OS) was 8.36 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 6.8–9.8 months) and median progression-free survival was 4.4 months (95% CI 3.3–4.9 months). Grade 3 or 4 toxicities were seen in 42.5% (n = 36) of the total patients.

Conclusions:

The study provides the patterns and outcomes of systemic treatment in metastatic EGFR-mutated lung adenocarcinoma in patients who have progressed on two or more lines of systemic therapies. This data suggest that third-line systemic therapy may provide meaningful outcomes in these patients.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of third-line salvage therapy for the treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Purpose

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy of third-line treatment for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Materials and Methods

Relevant trials were identified by searching electronic databases and conference meetings. Prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing third-line therapy in advanced NSCLC patients were included. Outcomes of interest included overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS).

Results

A total of 1,985 advanced NSCLC patients received third-line treatment from 11 RCTs were included for analysis. The use of single targeted agent as third-line therapy for advanced NSCLC did not significantly improved PFS (HR 0.75, 95% CI: 0.28–2.04, p = 0.58) and OS (HR 1.01, 95% CI: 0.86–1.17, p = 0.95) when compared to docetaxel alone. In addition, erlotinib-based doublet combination therapy did not significantly improved PFS (HR 0.94, 95% CI: 0.78–1.13, p = 0.49) and OS (HR 1.08, 95% CI: 0.78–1.51, p = 0.65) in comparison with erlotinib alone.

Conclusions

The findings of this study show that the efficacy of single novel targeted agent is comparable to that of docetaxel alone in terms of PFS and OS for heavily pretreated NSCLC patients. In addition, no survival benefits are obtained from erlotinib-based doublet therapy, thus single agent erlotinib could be recommended as third-line treatment for unselected advanced NSCLC patients.

Comparison of apatinib and capecitabine (Xeloda) with capecitabine (Xeloda) in advanced triple-negative breast cancer as third-line therapy: A retrospective study

The treatment of advanced triple-negative breast cancer, which failed in first-line or second-line therapy, is a significant challenge. We conducted this retrospective study to explore the efficacy and safety of apatinib and capecitabine as the third-line treatment for advanced triple-negative breast cancer.This retrospective study involved 44 advanced triple-negative breast cancer patients who failed in first-line or second-line therapy in Tangshan People's Hospital from January 2016 to February 2017. Twenty-two patients received apatinib and capecitabine, while 22 patients were treated with capecitabine monotherapy as third-line therapy. The progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and adverse events were compared between 2 groups.The apatinib and capecitabine group exhibited a higher PFS than capecitabine group (P = .001). Meanwhile, ORR and DCR in apatinib and capecitabine group were better than in capecitabine group (P = .042; .016). The 2 groups showed no significant difference in adverse events except degree I-II bleeding (P = .021). Both the apatinib and capecitabine and the capecitabine regimens revealed good tolerability.The apatinib and capecitabine regimen can achieve a better efficacy and similar serious adverse events compared with capecitabine regimen as the third-line treatment for advanced triple-negative breast cancer.

Bevacizumab as a last-line treatment for glioblastoma following failure of radiotherapy, temozolomide and lomustine

In previous trials, bevacizumab failed to prolong the overall survival time in newly diagnosed glioblastoma and at the first recurrence. Randomized clinical trials at the second or further recurrence following the failure of radiotherapy, temozolomide and lomustine, and retrospective analyses focusing on this specific cohort, are not yet available. A total of 62 patients with glioblastoma who received bevacizumab after the failure of standard care, including radiotherapy, temozolomide and lomustine, were retrospectively identified. Patient characteristics, previous treatment details, concomitant therapy, response based on the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology criteria, and progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) times and rates were evaluated. Furthermore, the PFS and OS times and rates were analyzed for responders and non-responders. Of the patients, 54.8% (n=34) responded to treatment [complete response (CR) 3.2%, n=2; partial response (PR) 51.6%, n=32]. The median PFS time was 3.5 months and the median OS time was 7.5 months. The PFS rate at 6 months was 21.5% and the OS rate at 12 months was 11.5%. Responders (CR or PR) experienced a superior median PFS time compared with non-responders (i.e. stable or progressive disease; 5.4 vs. 1.9 months; P<0.0001) and a superior PFS rate at 6 months (34.9 vs. 7.1%; P<0.0001). The median OS time (8.6 vs. 6.4 months; P<0.0001) and OS rate at 12 months (21.3 vs. 0%; P<0.0001) were also superior in patients who exhibited a response to bevacizumab treatment. In conclusion, the objective response rate and the PFS and OS times and rates indicate that bevacizumab has activity in patients with glioblastoma following the failure of radiotherapy, temozolomide, and lomustine. A randomized trial comparing bevacizumab with best supportive care in these patients is advised.

Patterns of practice with third-line anti-EGFR antibody for metastatic colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Therapy with anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (egfr) monoclonal antibody improves outcomes for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mcrc) in the first-, second-, and third-line trial settings. In British Columbia, the use of egfr inhibitors (egfris) is confined to third-line therapy, which might lower the proportion of patients who receive this therapy. The objective of the present study was to describe egfri treatment patterns when those agents are limited to the third-line setting. The results will inform decisions about optimal use of egfri agents, including earlier in the course of therapy for metastatic disease.

METHODS

All patients with newly diagnosed mcrc who were referred to BC Cancer Agency clinics in 2009 were included in the study. Prognostic and treatment information was prospectively collected; KRAS test results were determined by chart review.

RESULTS

The study included 443 patients with a median age of 66 years. For the 321 patients who received systemic therapy, median survival was 22.3 months. Of the 117 patients who were treated with 5-fluorouracil, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan, and who were potentially eligible for egfri therapy, 90% (105 patients) were tested for KRAS status. Of the 60 patients with KRAS wild-type tumours, 82% (49 patients) received egfri therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

When egfri therapy is limited to the third-line setting, only a small proportion of patients receive such therapy, with death and poor performance status preventing its use in the rest. Availability of egfri in earlier lines of therapy could increase the proportion of patients treated with all active systemic agents.

Rifabutin Containing Triple Therapy and Rifabutin with Bismuth Containing Quadruple Therapy for Third-Line Treatment of Helicobacter pylori Infection: Two Pilot Studies

AIM

To evaluate the therapeutic gain of the addition of bismuth to a rifabutin containing triple therapy with amoxicillin and pantoprazole at standard dosages for the treatment of third-line Helicobacter pylori infection after a preliminary susceptibility test.

METHODS

Two separate groups of patients in two pilot studies which were carried out simultaneously. One group was treated with rifabutin 150 mg b.i.d., pantoprazole 20 mg b.i.d., and amoxicillin 1 g b.i.d. for 10 days and the other group with rifabutin 150 mg b.i.d., pantoprazole 20 mg b.i.d., amoxicillin 1 g b.i.d., and bismuth subcitrate 240 mg b.i.d. for 10 days. All patients underwent to culture and susceptibility testing prior to their inclusion in the study. A successful outcome was confirmed with an Urea Breath test performed 8 weeks after the end of treatment. A blood cell count was performed for all patients at the start and after 5 days of treatment since rifabutin has been shown to inhibit the growth of leucocytes.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine patients were recruited in the pantoprazole, amoxicillin, rifabutin group and 30 in the pantoprazole, amoxicillin, rifabutin, and bismuth subcitrate group. All patients had a positive H. pylori culture and the susceptibility test used showed H. pylori sensitivity to rifabutin and amoxicillin. H. pylori eradication during follow-up was 18/27 (66.7%, 95% CI: 47.7-85.7%) in the pantoprazole, amoxicillin, rifabutin group and 28/29 (96.6%, 95% CI: 89.5-100.0%) in the pantoprazole, amoxicillin, rifabutin, and bismuth subcitrate group. Both treatments were well-tolerated with no reported side effects. Blood cell count remained normal in all patients.

CONCLUSION

The addition of bismuth subcitrate to a triple therapy that includes proton pump inhibitors, amoxicillin, and rifabutin in patients who are treated for the third time for H. pylori infection resulted in a 30% therapeutic gain.

Targeted therapy for renal cell carcinoma: focus on 2nd and 3rd line

INTRODUCTION

Second- and third-line treatments are more and more frequently administered to metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients.

AREAS COVERED

Here we discuss the various levels of evidence supporting presently available recommendations, trying to address a number of as yet unanswered issues, and also to take a glowing glance at the future. To do this, we interrogated the Medline database, as well as the proceedings of the main Oncological and Urological conferences for relevant studies.

EXPERT OPINION

Until recently, with regard to choosing the second line treatment after the failure of therapy with vascular endothelial growth factor receptors-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (VEGFR-TKIs), the continued inhibition of the VEGF/VEGR pathway, or else the switch to an mTOR inhibitor, is recommended. These two options are characterized by partly different targets, completely different toxicity profiles, but a comparable efficacy. This scenario will change soon, after the publication of two randomized, controlled, phase III trials in which cabozantinib and nivolumab proved to be superior as compared to everolimus. As regards third line treatment, where a sequence of two VEGFR-TKIs has been used beforehand, the choice is represented by the mTOR inhibitor everolimus, whilst if a VEGFR-TKI followed by everolimus has been chosen, a return to VEGF pathway inhibition is suggested.

Third- and further-line therapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients: an overview

Non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treatment has led to improved efficacy and compliance due to individual tailoring of the therapeutic options and the use of strategies based on both clinical characteristics and histological and biological features of the disease. In nonsquamous NSCLC, novel agents, such as pemetrexed and bevacizumab, have improved survival in the first-line setting. Maintenance therapy with pemetrexed and erlotinib resulted in improved progression-free survival compared with second-line therapy at disease progression. In the second-line setting, pemetrexed improves survival in nonsquamous NSCLC compared with docetaxel, and erlotinib has shown a survival benefit compared with best supportive care in patients who did not previously receive an EGF receptor inhibitor. Although the benefit of first- and second-line treatment over best supportive care alone has been firmly established, the role of further-line treatment remains controversial. This article summarizes the state-of-the-art treatments in this setting.

Efficacy of third-line therapy using bevacizumab in a patient with metastatic colorectal cancer

Bevacizumab is currently approved in association with first- and second-line 5-fluorouracil–based chemotherapy regimens for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Few data about the usefulness of bevacizumab in third-line settings are available. We describe a patient refractory to folfiri and folfox chemotherapy regimens who showed a dramatic and durable response to bevacizumab and folfiri. We also review and discuss the available literature.

Quinolone-Based Third-Line Therapy for Helicobacter pylori Eradication

Currently, a standard third-line therapy for Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) eradication remains to be established. Quinolones show good oral absorption, no major side effects, and marked activity against H. pylori. Several authors have studied quinolone-based third-line therapy and reported encouraging results, with the reported H. pylori cure rates ranging from 60% to 84%. Resistance to quinolones is easily acquired, and the resistance rate is relatively high in countries with a high consumption rate of these drugs. We recently reported a significant difference in the eradication rate obtained between patients infected with gatifloxacin-susceptible and gatifloxacin-resistant H. pylori, suggesting that the selection of quinolones for third-line therapy should be based on the results of drug susceptibility testing. As other alternatives of third-line rescue therapies, rifabutin-based triple therapy, high-dose proton pump inhibitor/amoxicillin therapy and furazolidone-based therapy have been suggested.