Deficiencies in health-related quality-of-life assessment and reporting: a systematic review of oncology randomized phase III trials published between 2012 and 2016

Quality of life (QoL) is a relevant end point and a topic of growing interest by both scientific community and regulatory authorities. Our aim was to review QoL prevalence as an end point in cancer phase III trials published in major journals and to evaluate QoL reporting deficiencies in terms of under-reporting and delay of publication. All issues published between 2012 and 2016 by 11 major journals were hand-searched for primary publications of phase III trials in adult patients with solid tumors. Information about end points was derived from paper and study protocol, when available. Secondary QoL publications were searched in PubMed. In total, 446 publications were eligible. In 210 (47.1%), QoL was not included among end points. QoL was not an end point in 40.1% of trials in the advanced/metastatic setting, 39.7% of profit trials and 53.6% of non-profit trials. Out of 231 primary publications of trials with QoL as secondary or exploratory end point, QoL results were available in 143 (61.9%). QoL results were absent in 37.6% of publications in the advanced/metastatic setting, in 37.1% of profit trials and 39.3% of non-profit trials. Proportion of trials not including QoL as end point or with missing QoL results was relevant in all tumor types and for all treatment types. Overall, 70 secondary QoL publications were found: for trials without QoL results in the primary publication, probability of secondary publication was 12.5%, 30.9% and 40.3% at 1, 2 and 3 years, respectively. Proportion of trials not reporting QoL results was similar in trials with positive results (36.5%) and with negative results (39.4%), but the probability of secondary publication was higher in positive trials. QoL is not included among end points in a relevant proportion of recently published phase III trials in solid tumors. In addition, QoL results are subject to significant under-reporting and delay in publication.

Carboplatin-paclitaxel compared to Carboplatin-Paclitaxel-Bevacizumab in advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer: MITO END-2 - A randomized phase II trial

OBJECTIVE

Increased Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Receptor (VEGF) expression in endometrial cancer (EC) is associated with a poor prognosis. Preliminary clinical data reported Bevacizumab effectiveness in EC both as single agent and in combination with chemotherapy.

METHODS

In a phase II trial, patients with advanced (FIGO stage III-IV) or recurrent EC were randomized to receive Carboplatin-Paclitaxel standard dose for 6-8 cycles vs Carboplatin-Paclitaxel and Bevacizumab 15 mg/kg in combination with chemotherapy and maintenance until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was progression free survival (PFS).

RESULTS

108 patients were randomized; PFS (10.5 vs 13.7 months, HR 0.84 p = 0.43), overall response rate (ORR 53.1% vs 74.4%) and overall survival (OS) (29.7 vs 40.0 months, HR 0.71 p = 0.24) resulted in a non-significant increase in Bevacizumab treated patients. The PFS increase became significant when an exploratory analysis with the Breslow test was used. Moreover, patients treated with Bevacizumab experienced a significant increase in 6-month disease control rate (70.4% vs 90.7%). Cardiovascular events were more frequent in the experimental arm ("de novo" grade ≥2 hypertension 21% vs 0% and grade ≥2 thromboembolic events 11% vs 2% in the Bevacizumab vs standard treatment arm, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy in the treatment of advanced/recurrent EC failed to demonstrate a significant increase in PFS in the MITO END-2 trial. Nevertheless, these preliminary data suggests some effectiveness of the antiangiogenic agent which merits further exploration in a larger population with a better molecular characterization.

Efficacy and safety of everolimus treatment in a hemodialysis patient with metastatic atypical bronchial carcinoid: case report and literature review

Background

Everolimus was recently approved for the treatment of neuroendocrine tumors. However, its efficacy and tolerability in hemodialysis patients with end-stage renal disease is not established.

Case presentation

We describe the case of a 47-year-old man with end-stage renal disease who received everolimus plus Lanreotide for 9 months for the management of metastatic atypical bronchial carcinoid.

Conclusions

Everolimus is a treatment option for hemodialysis patients with metastatic atypical bronchial carcinoid. Based on our case report and review of literature, Everolimus does not require any dose reductions and is overall well tolerated in hemodialysis patients.

Novel anti-angiogenic therapeutic strategies in colorectal cancer

INTRODUCTION

Anti-angiogenetic agents are currently the standard of care in metastatic CRC patients. Bevacizumab, aflibercept, regorafenib and recently ramucirumab have significantly improved both progression-free and overall survival in different lines of treatment. Since bevacizumab's approval, a number of novel anti-VEGF agents have been tested in preclinical and clinical models.

AREAS COVERED

This review is focused on the most recent clinical results of novel agents targeting VEGF and its receptors with a major focus on those investigated recently in clinical trials.

EXPERT OPINION

In the last 15 years, a number of new anti-angiogenetic agents have been tested. Unfortunately, most of them have demonstrated unacceptable toxicities or failed to show activity. When tested as single agents, encouraging preliminary results were reported with fruquintinib, famitinib, and nintedanib. Interesting novel mechanisms of action are also being explored: VGX-100 is a monoclonal antibody (mAb) which binds to VEGF-C, inhibiting activation of VEGFR-2 and VEGFR-3 when combined with bevacizumab; tanibirumab is a mAb which binds to VEGFR-2 and vanucizumab is a bispecific mAb binding both to VEGF-A and Angiopoietin-2. Data about the combination of these agents with chemotherapy are very encouraging, even though preliminary. However, the definition of specific predictive biomarkers remains a priority.