User login
Antibiotics gut checkpoint inhibitor efficacy
SAN FRANCISCO – Antibiotic exposure in the month before cancer immunotherapy starts may hamper the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors, investigators caution.
A prospective study of 196 patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors for various cancers showed that the 29 patients who received antibiotics within 30 days of starting immunotherapy had significantly worse overall survival than patients without antibiotic exposure; this effect was seen across cancer types, reported David James Pinato, MD, PhD, from Imperial College London.
In contrast, concurrent antibiotic and checkpoint inhibitor use was not significantly associated with overall survival differences, he said at the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) – Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC): Clinical Immuno-Oncology Symposium.
“I think these data are quite interesting in showing an independent detrimental effect, both on response and survival, in unselected patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors in routine clinical practice,” Dr. Pinato said.
The data also suggest “the timing of antibiotic exposure is crucial,” he added. Antibiotic treatment concurrent with immunotherapy did not appear to affect prognosis. Alternatively, prior antibiotic therapy appeared to have “a sort of a priming effect towards the immune system.”
Broad-spectrum antibiotics can affect the diversity of the gut microbiome, which influences mucosal immunity, dendritic cell function, and antigen presentation. Alternatively, enrichment of the microbiome with several bacterial species can enhance the potency of checkpoint inhibitors by facilitating the process of tumor rejection, Dr. Pinato explained.
To see whether antibiotic disruption, or “dysbiosis” of the gut microbiome, could hinder responsiveness to checkpoint inhibitors regardless of the tumor site and whether there were time-dependent effects of antibiotic exposure on response to checkpoint inhibitors, the investigators conducted a prospective, observational study in 196 patients treated with checkpoint inhibitors for non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), melanoma, renal cell carcinoma, head and neck cancer, transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder, and other cancers.
The researchers defined prior antibiotic exposure as more than 30 days before the start of checkpoint inhibitor therapy and concurrent exposure as antibiotics begun on the first day of the first cycle of checkpoint inhibitor dosing.
Of the 196 patients, 29 had previously received antibiotics, and 68 received them concurrently. The most frequently prescribed antibiotics were beta-lactam agents given in a single, short course. Other classes of drugs, used in eight or fewer patients each, included quinolones, macrolides, sulfonamides, tetracyclines, aminoglycosides, and nitroimidazole.
Median overall survival for the entire cohort, one of two primary outcomes, was 2 months for patients who had received prior antibiotics and 26 months for patients with no prior exposure. This difference was similar for patients with NSCLC (2.5 vs. 26 months), melanoma (3.9 vs. 14 months), and other cancers combined (1.1 vs. 11.0 months; log-rank P less than .01 for all comparisons).
In multivariate analysis, only response to checkpoints inhibitors (complete vs. partial response, stable disease, or progression) and prior antibiotic exposure were significantly associated with survival. The hazard ratio for survival for patients who had not previously received antibiotics was 3.5 (P less than .001).
In contrast, concurrent antibiotic and checkpoint inhibitor use did not have a significant effect on survival.
An analysis of radiologic responses also showed that patients with prior antibiotic exposure had a significantly higher probability of primary disease progression than those without (81% vs. 44%; P less than .001). There were no associations, however, between specific classes of antibiotics or corticosteroid use.
The findings indicate that “certainly, mechanistic studies are required here, not just to investigate the prognostic role of antibiotic-mediated dysbiosis, but perhaps transform this into an actual driver of antitumor immunity,” Dr. Pinato concluded.
The study was internally supported. Dr. Pinato reported receiving grant funding from Merck and Bristol-Myers Squibb unrelated to the study, as well as honoraria from ViiV Healthcare.
SOURCE: Pinato DJ et al. ASCO-SITC, Abstract 147.
SAN FRANCISCO – Antibiotic exposure in the month before cancer immunotherapy starts may hamper the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors, investigators caution.
A prospective study of 196 patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors for various cancers showed that the 29 patients who received antibiotics within 30 days of starting immunotherapy had significantly worse overall survival than patients without antibiotic exposure; this effect was seen across cancer types, reported David James Pinato, MD, PhD, from Imperial College London.
In contrast, concurrent antibiotic and checkpoint inhibitor use was not significantly associated with overall survival differences, he said at the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) – Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC): Clinical Immuno-Oncology Symposium.
“I think these data are quite interesting in showing an independent detrimental effect, both on response and survival, in unselected patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors in routine clinical practice,” Dr. Pinato said.
The data also suggest “the timing of antibiotic exposure is crucial,” he added. Antibiotic treatment concurrent with immunotherapy did not appear to affect prognosis. Alternatively, prior antibiotic therapy appeared to have “a sort of a priming effect towards the immune system.”
Broad-spectrum antibiotics can affect the diversity of the gut microbiome, which influences mucosal immunity, dendritic cell function, and antigen presentation. Alternatively, enrichment of the microbiome with several bacterial species can enhance the potency of checkpoint inhibitors by facilitating the process of tumor rejection, Dr. Pinato explained.
To see whether antibiotic disruption, or “dysbiosis” of the gut microbiome, could hinder responsiveness to checkpoint inhibitors regardless of the tumor site and whether there were time-dependent effects of antibiotic exposure on response to checkpoint inhibitors, the investigators conducted a prospective, observational study in 196 patients treated with checkpoint inhibitors for non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), melanoma, renal cell carcinoma, head and neck cancer, transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder, and other cancers.
The researchers defined prior antibiotic exposure as more than 30 days before the start of checkpoint inhibitor therapy and concurrent exposure as antibiotics begun on the first day of the first cycle of checkpoint inhibitor dosing.
Of the 196 patients, 29 had previously received antibiotics, and 68 received them concurrently. The most frequently prescribed antibiotics were beta-lactam agents given in a single, short course. Other classes of drugs, used in eight or fewer patients each, included quinolones, macrolides, sulfonamides, tetracyclines, aminoglycosides, and nitroimidazole.
Median overall survival for the entire cohort, one of two primary outcomes, was 2 months for patients who had received prior antibiotics and 26 months for patients with no prior exposure. This difference was similar for patients with NSCLC (2.5 vs. 26 months), melanoma (3.9 vs. 14 months), and other cancers combined (1.1 vs. 11.0 months; log-rank P less than .01 for all comparisons).
In multivariate analysis, only response to checkpoints inhibitors (complete vs. partial response, stable disease, or progression) and prior antibiotic exposure were significantly associated with survival. The hazard ratio for survival for patients who had not previously received antibiotics was 3.5 (P less than .001).
In contrast, concurrent antibiotic and checkpoint inhibitor use did not have a significant effect on survival.
An analysis of radiologic responses also showed that patients with prior antibiotic exposure had a significantly higher probability of primary disease progression than those without (81% vs. 44%; P less than .001). There were no associations, however, between specific classes of antibiotics or corticosteroid use.
The findings indicate that “certainly, mechanistic studies are required here, not just to investigate the prognostic role of antibiotic-mediated dysbiosis, but perhaps transform this into an actual driver of antitumor immunity,” Dr. Pinato concluded.
The study was internally supported. Dr. Pinato reported receiving grant funding from Merck and Bristol-Myers Squibb unrelated to the study, as well as honoraria from ViiV Healthcare.
SOURCE: Pinato DJ et al. ASCO-SITC, Abstract 147.
SAN FRANCISCO – Antibiotic exposure in the month before cancer immunotherapy starts may hamper the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors, investigators caution.
A prospective study of 196 patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors for various cancers showed that the 29 patients who received antibiotics within 30 days of starting immunotherapy had significantly worse overall survival than patients without antibiotic exposure; this effect was seen across cancer types, reported David James Pinato, MD, PhD, from Imperial College London.
In contrast, concurrent antibiotic and checkpoint inhibitor use was not significantly associated with overall survival differences, he said at the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) – Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC): Clinical Immuno-Oncology Symposium.
“I think these data are quite interesting in showing an independent detrimental effect, both on response and survival, in unselected patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors in routine clinical practice,” Dr. Pinato said.
The data also suggest “the timing of antibiotic exposure is crucial,” he added. Antibiotic treatment concurrent with immunotherapy did not appear to affect prognosis. Alternatively, prior antibiotic therapy appeared to have “a sort of a priming effect towards the immune system.”
Broad-spectrum antibiotics can affect the diversity of the gut microbiome, which influences mucosal immunity, dendritic cell function, and antigen presentation. Alternatively, enrichment of the microbiome with several bacterial species can enhance the potency of checkpoint inhibitors by facilitating the process of tumor rejection, Dr. Pinato explained.
To see whether antibiotic disruption, or “dysbiosis” of the gut microbiome, could hinder responsiveness to checkpoint inhibitors regardless of the tumor site and whether there were time-dependent effects of antibiotic exposure on response to checkpoint inhibitors, the investigators conducted a prospective, observational study in 196 patients treated with checkpoint inhibitors for non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), melanoma, renal cell carcinoma, head and neck cancer, transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder, and other cancers.
The researchers defined prior antibiotic exposure as more than 30 days before the start of checkpoint inhibitor therapy and concurrent exposure as antibiotics begun on the first day of the first cycle of checkpoint inhibitor dosing.
Of the 196 patients, 29 had previously received antibiotics, and 68 received them concurrently. The most frequently prescribed antibiotics were beta-lactam agents given in a single, short course. Other classes of drugs, used in eight or fewer patients each, included quinolones, macrolides, sulfonamides, tetracyclines, aminoglycosides, and nitroimidazole.
Median overall survival for the entire cohort, one of two primary outcomes, was 2 months for patients who had received prior antibiotics and 26 months for patients with no prior exposure. This difference was similar for patients with NSCLC (2.5 vs. 26 months), melanoma (3.9 vs. 14 months), and other cancers combined (1.1 vs. 11.0 months; log-rank P less than .01 for all comparisons).
In multivariate analysis, only response to checkpoints inhibitors (complete vs. partial response, stable disease, or progression) and prior antibiotic exposure were significantly associated with survival. The hazard ratio for survival for patients who had not previously received antibiotics was 3.5 (P less than .001).
In contrast, concurrent antibiotic and checkpoint inhibitor use did not have a significant effect on survival.
An analysis of radiologic responses also showed that patients with prior antibiotic exposure had a significantly higher probability of primary disease progression than those without (81% vs. 44%; P less than .001). There were no associations, however, between specific classes of antibiotics or corticosteroid use.
The findings indicate that “certainly, mechanistic studies are required here, not just to investigate the prognostic role of antibiotic-mediated dysbiosis, but perhaps transform this into an actual driver of antitumor immunity,” Dr. Pinato concluded.
The study was internally supported. Dr. Pinato reported receiving grant funding from Merck and Bristol-Myers Squibb unrelated to the study, as well as honoraria from ViiV Healthcare.
SOURCE: Pinato DJ et al. ASCO-SITC, Abstract 147.
REPORTING FROM ASCO-SITC
Myeloma risk score has treatment-planning potential
A proposed clinical scoring system using readily available laboratory data, rather than complex formulas, can be used to predict risk for overall survival and help with clinical decision making for patients with multiple myeloma who are ineligible for stem cell transplants, the system’s creators claim.
When applied to data from two clinical trials that enrolled patients with transplant-ineligible multiple myeloma, the UK Myeloma Research Alliance Risk Profile (MRP) was shown to accurately group patients into low-, medium- and high-risk categories and was prognostic of overall survival, reported Gordon Cook, PhD, of the University of Leeds, England, and his colleagues.
“The ability of clinical scoring systems, such as that proposed here, to predict whether a patient is likely to stop treatment early because of treatment intolerability, could enable preemptive, upfront dose adjustments in patients with multiple myeloma, preventing toxicity and potentially enabling patients to stay on therapy for longer,” they wrote in the Lancet Haematology.
The investigators used data on 1,852 newly diagnosed patients recruited to the non–intensive treatment pathway of the UK’s National Cancer Research Institute Myeloma XI study (NCRI-XI, ISRCTN49407852) for a training dataset and internal validation dataset, and 520 patients recruited into the Medical Research Council Myeloma IX study (MRC-IX, ISRCTN68454111) for the test dataset.
Patient characteristics, biochemical measurements, and hematological data were plugged into univariate and multivariate models to determine their potential as prognostic variables.
The final model for the test and validation datasets included World Health Organization performance status, the multiple myeloma International Staging System, patient age, and C-reactive protein concentrations.
As noted before, the scoring algorithm groups patients into low-, medium- and high-risk categories, with each of the prognostic variables increasing in severity across the three groups in both clinical trials.
In the NCRI-XI trial, median overall survival for patients in the MRP low-risk group was 60 months, compared with 44 months in the medium-risk group, and 25 months in the high-risk group.
Similarly, in the MRC-IX trial, the respective median overall survival was 49, 34, and 20 months.
The risk groups also were associated with progression-free survival in each trial, although not as robustly as the association with overall survival.
The investigators also found that, the higher the risk group, the greater the likelihood that the median percentage of protocol dose delivered would be lower, and both a decrease in protocol dose delivered and quality of life at baseline were associated with increased risk.
The MRP categories were prognostic in patients treated with various therapeutic regimens and in patients with high-risk cytogenetics.
“None of the risk scoring systems previously developed in myeloma are dynamic, making them unable to accommodate changes in disease-related frailty that might be minimized by effective anti-myeloma therapy. There is therefore scope to improve clinical risk scores by the addition of a suitable frailty biomarker, which is currently still in developmental stages,” Dr. Cook and his colleagues wrote.
The study was funded by the Medical Research Council, Novartis, Schering Health Care, Chugai, Pharmion, Celgene, Ortho Biotech, Cancer Research UK, Celgene, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Amgen. Dr. Cook reported grants and nonfinancial support from Celgene, Amgen, and Merck Sharp & Dohme, during the conduct of the study and personal fees from other companies outside the submitted work.
SOURCE: Cook G et al. Lancet Haematol. 2019 Mar;6(3):e154-66.
A proposed clinical scoring system using readily available laboratory data, rather than complex formulas, can be used to predict risk for overall survival and help with clinical decision making for patients with multiple myeloma who are ineligible for stem cell transplants, the system’s creators claim.
When applied to data from two clinical trials that enrolled patients with transplant-ineligible multiple myeloma, the UK Myeloma Research Alliance Risk Profile (MRP) was shown to accurately group patients into low-, medium- and high-risk categories and was prognostic of overall survival, reported Gordon Cook, PhD, of the University of Leeds, England, and his colleagues.
“The ability of clinical scoring systems, such as that proposed here, to predict whether a patient is likely to stop treatment early because of treatment intolerability, could enable preemptive, upfront dose adjustments in patients with multiple myeloma, preventing toxicity and potentially enabling patients to stay on therapy for longer,” they wrote in the Lancet Haematology.
The investigators used data on 1,852 newly diagnosed patients recruited to the non–intensive treatment pathway of the UK’s National Cancer Research Institute Myeloma XI study (NCRI-XI, ISRCTN49407852) for a training dataset and internal validation dataset, and 520 patients recruited into the Medical Research Council Myeloma IX study (MRC-IX, ISRCTN68454111) for the test dataset.
Patient characteristics, biochemical measurements, and hematological data were plugged into univariate and multivariate models to determine their potential as prognostic variables.
The final model for the test and validation datasets included World Health Organization performance status, the multiple myeloma International Staging System, patient age, and C-reactive protein concentrations.
As noted before, the scoring algorithm groups patients into low-, medium- and high-risk categories, with each of the prognostic variables increasing in severity across the three groups in both clinical trials.
In the NCRI-XI trial, median overall survival for patients in the MRP low-risk group was 60 months, compared with 44 months in the medium-risk group, and 25 months in the high-risk group.
Similarly, in the MRC-IX trial, the respective median overall survival was 49, 34, and 20 months.
The risk groups also were associated with progression-free survival in each trial, although not as robustly as the association with overall survival.
The investigators also found that, the higher the risk group, the greater the likelihood that the median percentage of protocol dose delivered would be lower, and both a decrease in protocol dose delivered and quality of life at baseline were associated with increased risk.
The MRP categories were prognostic in patients treated with various therapeutic regimens and in patients with high-risk cytogenetics.
“None of the risk scoring systems previously developed in myeloma are dynamic, making them unable to accommodate changes in disease-related frailty that might be minimized by effective anti-myeloma therapy. There is therefore scope to improve clinical risk scores by the addition of a suitable frailty biomarker, which is currently still in developmental stages,” Dr. Cook and his colleagues wrote.
The study was funded by the Medical Research Council, Novartis, Schering Health Care, Chugai, Pharmion, Celgene, Ortho Biotech, Cancer Research UK, Celgene, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Amgen. Dr. Cook reported grants and nonfinancial support from Celgene, Amgen, and Merck Sharp & Dohme, during the conduct of the study and personal fees from other companies outside the submitted work.
SOURCE: Cook G et al. Lancet Haematol. 2019 Mar;6(3):e154-66.
A proposed clinical scoring system using readily available laboratory data, rather than complex formulas, can be used to predict risk for overall survival and help with clinical decision making for patients with multiple myeloma who are ineligible for stem cell transplants, the system’s creators claim.
When applied to data from two clinical trials that enrolled patients with transplant-ineligible multiple myeloma, the UK Myeloma Research Alliance Risk Profile (MRP) was shown to accurately group patients into low-, medium- and high-risk categories and was prognostic of overall survival, reported Gordon Cook, PhD, of the University of Leeds, England, and his colleagues.
“The ability of clinical scoring systems, such as that proposed here, to predict whether a patient is likely to stop treatment early because of treatment intolerability, could enable preemptive, upfront dose adjustments in patients with multiple myeloma, preventing toxicity and potentially enabling patients to stay on therapy for longer,” they wrote in the Lancet Haematology.
The investigators used data on 1,852 newly diagnosed patients recruited to the non–intensive treatment pathway of the UK’s National Cancer Research Institute Myeloma XI study (NCRI-XI, ISRCTN49407852) for a training dataset and internal validation dataset, and 520 patients recruited into the Medical Research Council Myeloma IX study (MRC-IX, ISRCTN68454111) for the test dataset.
Patient characteristics, biochemical measurements, and hematological data were plugged into univariate and multivariate models to determine their potential as prognostic variables.
The final model for the test and validation datasets included World Health Organization performance status, the multiple myeloma International Staging System, patient age, and C-reactive protein concentrations.
As noted before, the scoring algorithm groups patients into low-, medium- and high-risk categories, with each of the prognostic variables increasing in severity across the three groups in both clinical trials.
In the NCRI-XI trial, median overall survival for patients in the MRP low-risk group was 60 months, compared with 44 months in the medium-risk group, and 25 months in the high-risk group.
Similarly, in the MRC-IX trial, the respective median overall survival was 49, 34, and 20 months.
The risk groups also were associated with progression-free survival in each trial, although not as robustly as the association with overall survival.
The investigators also found that, the higher the risk group, the greater the likelihood that the median percentage of protocol dose delivered would be lower, and both a decrease in protocol dose delivered and quality of life at baseline were associated with increased risk.
The MRP categories were prognostic in patients treated with various therapeutic regimens and in patients with high-risk cytogenetics.
“None of the risk scoring systems previously developed in myeloma are dynamic, making them unable to accommodate changes in disease-related frailty that might be minimized by effective anti-myeloma therapy. There is therefore scope to improve clinical risk scores by the addition of a suitable frailty biomarker, which is currently still in developmental stages,” Dr. Cook and his colleagues wrote.
The study was funded by the Medical Research Council, Novartis, Schering Health Care, Chugai, Pharmion, Celgene, Ortho Biotech, Cancer Research UK, Celgene, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Amgen. Dr. Cook reported grants and nonfinancial support from Celgene, Amgen, and Merck Sharp & Dohme, during the conduct of the study and personal fees from other companies outside the submitted work.
SOURCE: Cook G et al. Lancet Haematol. 2019 Mar;6(3):e154-66.
FROM THE LANCET HAEMATOLOGY
Pembrolizumab/lenvatinib active against urothelial carcinoma
SAN FRANCISCO – A combination of a targeted therapy and an immune checkpoint inhibitor showed promising activity against advanced urothelial cancer in early data from a phase 1b/2 study.
In a cohort of 20 patients with urothelial carcinoma who were enrolled in a larger clinical trial testing the combination of the tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) lenvatinib (Lenvima) and the checkpoint inhibitor pembrolizumab (Keytruda) against urinary tract and other solid malignancies, 5 had an objective response to the combination, including one complete and four partial responses, for an objective response rate of 25%, reported Nicholas J. Vogelzang, MD, from Comprehensive Cancers Centers of Nevada in Las Vegas.
“This response rate warrants further investigation. The lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab combination will be studied in a phase 3 trial in urothelial carcinoma,” he said at the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) - Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC): Clinical Immuno-Oncology Symposium.
Dr. Vogelzang noted that urothelial carcinomas account for more than 90% of all bladder cancers. Pembrolizumab monotherapy is approved for treatment of patients with urothelial carcinoma who are ineligible for cisplatin and whose tumors have a combined positive score (CPS) for programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) of 10 or greater or who are ineligible for platinum-based chemotherapy regimens and, in the second line, for advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma.
Lenvatinib, a multikinase inhibitor, is approved as monotherapy for radioiodine-refractory differentiated thyroid cancer, unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma, and in combination with everolimus for advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) after one year of antiangiogenic therapy.
Dr. Vogelzang reported results of the urothelial cancer cohort from a multicohort study testing the combination.
Twenty patients with histologically confirmed metastatic urothelial cancer were enrolled. The patients all had no more than two prior systemic regimens, good performance status, and a life expectancy of at least 12 weeks. The patients received oral lenvatinib 20 mg daily and pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every 21 days. The median patient age was 72 years. The cohort included 14 men and six women.
The objective response rate (ORR) at 24 weeks, the primary endpoint, was 25%, comprising one complete and four partial responses. Nine patients had stable disease, two had disease progression, and four were not evaluable for efficacy. The results were identical according to immune-related Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1 and modified RECIST version 1.1. Of the 16 evaluable patients, 12 experienced tumor-size reductions from baseline.
“Although there were five objective responses, there were an additional seven patients or more who had minor regressions of disease – clearly an active regimen,” Dr. Vogelzang said. Four of the patients, including one with a PD-L1–positive tumor and three with PD-L1–negative tumors were still alive, with the longest survival past 80 weeks since the start of therapy. The majority of patients, however, had no objective response or disease progression within about 20 weeks.
After a median follow-up of 11.7 months, the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.4 months, and the 12-month PFS rate was 26%.
In all, 18 of the 20 patients (90%) experienced a treatment-related adverse event of any grade, 10 had grade 3 or 4 events, and 6 had serious adverse events including one death from gastrointestinal hemorrhage that Dr. Vogelzang said appeared to be related to lenvatinib. A total of four patients (20%) had a treatment-related event leading to withdrawal or discontinuation, seven had a dose reduction, and 12 had an interruption in therapy, primarily of lenvatinib. The most common toxicities were proteinuria, diarrhea, hypertension, fatigue, hypothyroidism, decreased appetite with nausea, pancreatitis with increased lipase, skin rash, vomiting, and dry mouth.
In addition to the planned phase 3 trial of the combination in urothelial carcinoma, lenvatinib/pembrolizumab is also being studied for the treatment of RCC.
The study was supported by Eisai and Merck Sharp & Dohme. Dr. Vogelzang disclosed financial relationships with Caris Life Sciences, Pfizer, Up to Date, AstraZeneca, MedImmune, and other companies. Five coauthors are employees of Merck or Esai.
SOURCE: Vogelzang NJ et al. ASCO-SITC, Abstract 11.
SAN FRANCISCO – A combination of a targeted therapy and an immune checkpoint inhibitor showed promising activity against advanced urothelial cancer in early data from a phase 1b/2 study.
In a cohort of 20 patients with urothelial carcinoma who were enrolled in a larger clinical trial testing the combination of the tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) lenvatinib (Lenvima) and the checkpoint inhibitor pembrolizumab (Keytruda) against urinary tract and other solid malignancies, 5 had an objective response to the combination, including one complete and four partial responses, for an objective response rate of 25%, reported Nicholas J. Vogelzang, MD, from Comprehensive Cancers Centers of Nevada in Las Vegas.
“This response rate warrants further investigation. The lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab combination will be studied in a phase 3 trial in urothelial carcinoma,” he said at the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) - Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC): Clinical Immuno-Oncology Symposium.
Dr. Vogelzang noted that urothelial carcinomas account for more than 90% of all bladder cancers. Pembrolizumab monotherapy is approved for treatment of patients with urothelial carcinoma who are ineligible for cisplatin and whose tumors have a combined positive score (CPS) for programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) of 10 or greater or who are ineligible for platinum-based chemotherapy regimens and, in the second line, for advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma.
Lenvatinib, a multikinase inhibitor, is approved as monotherapy for radioiodine-refractory differentiated thyroid cancer, unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma, and in combination with everolimus for advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) after one year of antiangiogenic therapy.
Dr. Vogelzang reported results of the urothelial cancer cohort from a multicohort study testing the combination.
Twenty patients with histologically confirmed metastatic urothelial cancer were enrolled. The patients all had no more than two prior systemic regimens, good performance status, and a life expectancy of at least 12 weeks. The patients received oral lenvatinib 20 mg daily and pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every 21 days. The median patient age was 72 years. The cohort included 14 men and six women.
The objective response rate (ORR) at 24 weeks, the primary endpoint, was 25%, comprising one complete and four partial responses. Nine patients had stable disease, two had disease progression, and four were not evaluable for efficacy. The results were identical according to immune-related Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1 and modified RECIST version 1.1. Of the 16 evaluable patients, 12 experienced tumor-size reductions from baseline.
“Although there were five objective responses, there were an additional seven patients or more who had minor regressions of disease – clearly an active regimen,” Dr. Vogelzang said. Four of the patients, including one with a PD-L1–positive tumor and three with PD-L1–negative tumors were still alive, with the longest survival past 80 weeks since the start of therapy. The majority of patients, however, had no objective response or disease progression within about 20 weeks.
After a median follow-up of 11.7 months, the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.4 months, and the 12-month PFS rate was 26%.
In all, 18 of the 20 patients (90%) experienced a treatment-related adverse event of any grade, 10 had grade 3 or 4 events, and 6 had serious adverse events including one death from gastrointestinal hemorrhage that Dr. Vogelzang said appeared to be related to lenvatinib. A total of four patients (20%) had a treatment-related event leading to withdrawal or discontinuation, seven had a dose reduction, and 12 had an interruption in therapy, primarily of lenvatinib. The most common toxicities were proteinuria, diarrhea, hypertension, fatigue, hypothyroidism, decreased appetite with nausea, pancreatitis with increased lipase, skin rash, vomiting, and dry mouth.
In addition to the planned phase 3 trial of the combination in urothelial carcinoma, lenvatinib/pembrolizumab is also being studied for the treatment of RCC.
The study was supported by Eisai and Merck Sharp & Dohme. Dr. Vogelzang disclosed financial relationships with Caris Life Sciences, Pfizer, Up to Date, AstraZeneca, MedImmune, and other companies. Five coauthors are employees of Merck or Esai.
SOURCE: Vogelzang NJ et al. ASCO-SITC, Abstract 11.
SAN FRANCISCO – A combination of a targeted therapy and an immune checkpoint inhibitor showed promising activity against advanced urothelial cancer in early data from a phase 1b/2 study.
In a cohort of 20 patients with urothelial carcinoma who were enrolled in a larger clinical trial testing the combination of the tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) lenvatinib (Lenvima) and the checkpoint inhibitor pembrolizumab (Keytruda) against urinary tract and other solid malignancies, 5 had an objective response to the combination, including one complete and four partial responses, for an objective response rate of 25%, reported Nicholas J. Vogelzang, MD, from Comprehensive Cancers Centers of Nevada in Las Vegas.
“This response rate warrants further investigation. The lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab combination will be studied in a phase 3 trial in urothelial carcinoma,” he said at the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) - Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC): Clinical Immuno-Oncology Symposium.
Dr. Vogelzang noted that urothelial carcinomas account for more than 90% of all bladder cancers. Pembrolizumab monotherapy is approved for treatment of patients with urothelial carcinoma who are ineligible for cisplatin and whose tumors have a combined positive score (CPS) for programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) of 10 or greater or who are ineligible for platinum-based chemotherapy regimens and, in the second line, for advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma.
Lenvatinib, a multikinase inhibitor, is approved as monotherapy for radioiodine-refractory differentiated thyroid cancer, unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma, and in combination with everolimus for advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) after one year of antiangiogenic therapy.
Dr. Vogelzang reported results of the urothelial cancer cohort from a multicohort study testing the combination.
Twenty patients with histologically confirmed metastatic urothelial cancer were enrolled. The patients all had no more than two prior systemic regimens, good performance status, and a life expectancy of at least 12 weeks. The patients received oral lenvatinib 20 mg daily and pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every 21 days. The median patient age was 72 years. The cohort included 14 men and six women.
The objective response rate (ORR) at 24 weeks, the primary endpoint, was 25%, comprising one complete and four partial responses. Nine patients had stable disease, two had disease progression, and four were not evaluable for efficacy. The results were identical according to immune-related Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1 and modified RECIST version 1.1. Of the 16 evaluable patients, 12 experienced tumor-size reductions from baseline.
“Although there were five objective responses, there were an additional seven patients or more who had minor regressions of disease – clearly an active regimen,” Dr. Vogelzang said. Four of the patients, including one with a PD-L1–positive tumor and three with PD-L1–negative tumors were still alive, with the longest survival past 80 weeks since the start of therapy. The majority of patients, however, had no objective response or disease progression within about 20 weeks.
After a median follow-up of 11.7 months, the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.4 months, and the 12-month PFS rate was 26%.
In all, 18 of the 20 patients (90%) experienced a treatment-related adverse event of any grade, 10 had grade 3 or 4 events, and 6 had serious adverse events including one death from gastrointestinal hemorrhage that Dr. Vogelzang said appeared to be related to lenvatinib. A total of four patients (20%) had a treatment-related event leading to withdrawal or discontinuation, seven had a dose reduction, and 12 had an interruption in therapy, primarily of lenvatinib. The most common toxicities were proteinuria, diarrhea, hypertension, fatigue, hypothyroidism, decreased appetite with nausea, pancreatitis with increased lipase, skin rash, vomiting, and dry mouth.
In addition to the planned phase 3 trial of the combination in urothelial carcinoma, lenvatinib/pembrolizumab is also being studied for the treatment of RCC.
The study was supported by Eisai and Merck Sharp & Dohme. Dr. Vogelzang disclosed financial relationships with Caris Life Sciences, Pfizer, Up to Date, AstraZeneca, MedImmune, and other companies. Five coauthors are employees of Merck or Esai.
SOURCE: Vogelzang NJ et al. ASCO-SITC, Abstract 11.
REPORTING FROM ASCO-SITC
Higher dose of checkpoint inhibitor every 4 weeks feasible in NSCLC
SAN FRANCISCO – For patients with advanced non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who previously had disease control with the checkpoint inhibitor nivolumab (Opdivo), second-line nivolumab at a higher dose every 4 weeks appeared to be comparable in efficacy and safety with standard-dose nivolumab every 2 weeks.
The key word in that last sentence is “appeared,” because the Checkmate 384 trial that was designed to show noninferiority of the every-4-weeks regimen lacked the statistical muscle to get the job done, reported Edward B. Garon, MD, from the University of California, Los Angeles.
“In many respects, extending the dosing frequency of nivolumab fulfills some of the promise of immunotherapy: The idea that we would be able to decrease the medicalization of the lives of our patients. For some people this would lead to them being able to resume a more normal work schedule, and for other people it would allow them to do things for fun, like travel on trips that would take longer than a couple of weeks,” he said at the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) – Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC): Clinical Immuno-Oncology Symposium.
However, because of difficulties in recruitment, the investigators had to stop enrollment early and settle for a sample size of 363 patients, instead of the 600 planned that would be necessary to meet a 10% noninferiority margin and one-sided 95% confidence interval. Thus, the trial analysis can only be reported as descriptive rather than definitive, Dr. Garon acknowledged.
Nivolumab is approved at a fixed dose of 240 mg every 2 weeks for the treatment of multiple tumor types in several different nations, and in the United States and Canada it is approved at a dose of 480 mg every 4 weeks for the treatment of NSCLC.
The CheckMate 384 study enrolled patients with advanced or metastatic NSCLC who had received 3 mg/kg or 240 mg of nivolumab every 2 weeks for up to 1 year. The patients had to have had relatively good performance status (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group 0-2) and two consecutive assessments of either complete response, partial response, or stable disease.
The patients were stratified by tumor histology (squamous or nonsquamous) and response to prior nivolumab therapy at randomization, and were then randomized to receive nivolumab 240 mg every 2 weeks or 480 mg every 4 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity for up to 2 years.
Dr. Garon presented an interim analysis including data on 329 of the 363 patients; the final analysis will occur after all patients have had a minimum of 12 months of follow-up. Here, he reported on 6-month progression-free survival, a coprimary endpoint with 12-month PFS.
After a median follow-up of 9.5 months in the Q4-week group and 10.2 months in the Q2-week group, the 6-month PFS rates were identical between the two dosing strategies, at 72%. The median PFS was 12.1 months and 12.2 months, respectively.
“Although the study is no longer formally powered to show noninferiority, there’s certainly nothing in these curves that makes me concerned that this 480 mg every-4-week dose would be inferior,” Dr. Garon said.
There was a slightly higher rate of treatment-related adverse events of any grade in the lower, more frequent dose group: 48% in the Q4-week versus 61% in the Q2-week arm. The respective rates of grade 3 or 4 adverse events were 8% and 12%. Rates of serious adverse events and events leading to treatment discontinuation were similar between the group; there were no treatment-related deaths.
The investigators hypothesize that the higher rate of overall events in the lower-dose group may be attributable to more frequent visits and more opportunities to report adverse events, Dr. Garon said.
“Overall, the clinical data are in agreement with the pharmacokinetic modeling and give further evidence for this 480 mg every 4 week nivolumab dosing option,” he concluded.
The study was supported by Bristol-Myers Squibb. Dr. Garon reported receiving research support from Bristol-Myers Squibb and others and consulting fees from Dracen Pharmaceuticals.
SOURCE: Garon EB et al. ASCO-SITC, Abstract 100.
SAN FRANCISCO – For patients with advanced non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who previously had disease control with the checkpoint inhibitor nivolumab (Opdivo), second-line nivolumab at a higher dose every 4 weeks appeared to be comparable in efficacy and safety with standard-dose nivolumab every 2 weeks.
The key word in that last sentence is “appeared,” because the Checkmate 384 trial that was designed to show noninferiority of the every-4-weeks regimen lacked the statistical muscle to get the job done, reported Edward B. Garon, MD, from the University of California, Los Angeles.
“In many respects, extending the dosing frequency of nivolumab fulfills some of the promise of immunotherapy: The idea that we would be able to decrease the medicalization of the lives of our patients. For some people this would lead to them being able to resume a more normal work schedule, and for other people it would allow them to do things for fun, like travel on trips that would take longer than a couple of weeks,” he said at the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) – Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC): Clinical Immuno-Oncology Symposium.
However, because of difficulties in recruitment, the investigators had to stop enrollment early and settle for a sample size of 363 patients, instead of the 600 planned that would be necessary to meet a 10% noninferiority margin and one-sided 95% confidence interval. Thus, the trial analysis can only be reported as descriptive rather than definitive, Dr. Garon acknowledged.
Nivolumab is approved at a fixed dose of 240 mg every 2 weeks for the treatment of multiple tumor types in several different nations, and in the United States and Canada it is approved at a dose of 480 mg every 4 weeks for the treatment of NSCLC.
The CheckMate 384 study enrolled patients with advanced or metastatic NSCLC who had received 3 mg/kg or 240 mg of nivolumab every 2 weeks for up to 1 year. The patients had to have had relatively good performance status (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group 0-2) and two consecutive assessments of either complete response, partial response, or stable disease.
The patients were stratified by tumor histology (squamous or nonsquamous) and response to prior nivolumab therapy at randomization, and were then randomized to receive nivolumab 240 mg every 2 weeks or 480 mg every 4 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity for up to 2 years.
Dr. Garon presented an interim analysis including data on 329 of the 363 patients; the final analysis will occur after all patients have had a minimum of 12 months of follow-up. Here, he reported on 6-month progression-free survival, a coprimary endpoint with 12-month PFS.
After a median follow-up of 9.5 months in the Q4-week group and 10.2 months in the Q2-week group, the 6-month PFS rates were identical between the two dosing strategies, at 72%. The median PFS was 12.1 months and 12.2 months, respectively.
“Although the study is no longer formally powered to show noninferiority, there’s certainly nothing in these curves that makes me concerned that this 480 mg every-4-week dose would be inferior,” Dr. Garon said.
There was a slightly higher rate of treatment-related adverse events of any grade in the lower, more frequent dose group: 48% in the Q4-week versus 61% in the Q2-week arm. The respective rates of grade 3 or 4 adverse events were 8% and 12%. Rates of serious adverse events and events leading to treatment discontinuation were similar between the group; there were no treatment-related deaths.
The investigators hypothesize that the higher rate of overall events in the lower-dose group may be attributable to more frequent visits and more opportunities to report adverse events, Dr. Garon said.
“Overall, the clinical data are in agreement with the pharmacokinetic modeling and give further evidence for this 480 mg every 4 week nivolumab dosing option,” he concluded.
The study was supported by Bristol-Myers Squibb. Dr. Garon reported receiving research support from Bristol-Myers Squibb and others and consulting fees from Dracen Pharmaceuticals.
SOURCE: Garon EB et al. ASCO-SITC, Abstract 100.
SAN FRANCISCO – For patients with advanced non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who previously had disease control with the checkpoint inhibitor nivolumab (Opdivo), second-line nivolumab at a higher dose every 4 weeks appeared to be comparable in efficacy and safety with standard-dose nivolumab every 2 weeks.
The key word in that last sentence is “appeared,” because the Checkmate 384 trial that was designed to show noninferiority of the every-4-weeks regimen lacked the statistical muscle to get the job done, reported Edward B. Garon, MD, from the University of California, Los Angeles.
“In many respects, extending the dosing frequency of nivolumab fulfills some of the promise of immunotherapy: The idea that we would be able to decrease the medicalization of the lives of our patients. For some people this would lead to them being able to resume a more normal work schedule, and for other people it would allow them to do things for fun, like travel on trips that would take longer than a couple of weeks,” he said at the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) – Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC): Clinical Immuno-Oncology Symposium.
However, because of difficulties in recruitment, the investigators had to stop enrollment early and settle for a sample size of 363 patients, instead of the 600 planned that would be necessary to meet a 10% noninferiority margin and one-sided 95% confidence interval. Thus, the trial analysis can only be reported as descriptive rather than definitive, Dr. Garon acknowledged.
Nivolumab is approved at a fixed dose of 240 mg every 2 weeks for the treatment of multiple tumor types in several different nations, and in the United States and Canada it is approved at a dose of 480 mg every 4 weeks for the treatment of NSCLC.
The CheckMate 384 study enrolled patients with advanced or metastatic NSCLC who had received 3 mg/kg or 240 mg of nivolumab every 2 weeks for up to 1 year. The patients had to have had relatively good performance status (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group 0-2) and two consecutive assessments of either complete response, partial response, or stable disease.
The patients were stratified by tumor histology (squamous or nonsquamous) and response to prior nivolumab therapy at randomization, and were then randomized to receive nivolumab 240 mg every 2 weeks or 480 mg every 4 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity for up to 2 years.
Dr. Garon presented an interim analysis including data on 329 of the 363 patients; the final analysis will occur after all patients have had a minimum of 12 months of follow-up. Here, he reported on 6-month progression-free survival, a coprimary endpoint with 12-month PFS.
After a median follow-up of 9.5 months in the Q4-week group and 10.2 months in the Q2-week group, the 6-month PFS rates were identical between the two dosing strategies, at 72%. The median PFS was 12.1 months and 12.2 months, respectively.
“Although the study is no longer formally powered to show noninferiority, there’s certainly nothing in these curves that makes me concerned that this 480 mg every-4-week dose would be inferior,” Dr. Garon said.
There was a slightly higher rate of treatment-related adverse events of any grade in the lower, more frequent dose group: 48% in the Q4-week versus 61% in the Q2-week arm. The respective rates of grade 3 or 4 adverse events were 8% and 12%. Rates of serious adverse events and events leading to treatment discontinuation were similar between the group; there were no treatment-related deaths.
The investigators hypothesize that the higher rate of overall events in the lower-dose group may be attributable to more frequent visits and more opportunities to report adverse events, Dr. Garon said.
“Overall, the clinical data are in agreement with the pharmacokinetic modeling and give further evidence for this 480 mg every 4 week nivolumab dosing option,” he concluded.
The study was supported by Bristol-Myers Squibb. Dr. Garon reported receiving research support from Bristol-Myers Squibb and others and consulting fees from Dracen Pharmaceuticals.
SOURCE: Garon EB et al. ASCO-SITC, Abstract 100.
REPORTING FROM ASCO-SITC
Anthracycline-free regimen OK in HER2-negative early breast cancer
It appears to be safe to hold the anthracycline in patients with HER2-negative early breast cancer who are at intermediate-to-high genomic risk, results of a large randomized trial suggest.
Among both pre- and postmenopausal women with pathologic stage T1 to T4c with positive nodes or node-negative but high-risk early breast cancer, there were no significant differences in 5-year outcomes for patients treated with six cycles of docetaxel and cyclophosphamide (TC) or four cycles of epirubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by four cycles of docetaxel (EC-T), reported Ulrike Nitz, MD, from the West German Study Group in Mönchengladbach, Germany, and her colleagues in the West German Study PlanB Trial.
Disease-free survival (DFS, the primary endpoint), distant recurrence-free interval (dRFI), and overall survival (OS) “were excellent and virtually identical in patients who received the anthracycline-containing or the anthracycline-free regimen. Subgroups that benefited from the anthracycline-containing regimen were not identified by interaction analysis, although a potentially clinically relevant benefit in particular (e.g., high-risk) subgroups cannot be ruled out,” they wrote. The report is in Journal of Clinical Oncology.
The investigators noted that anthracyclines are associated with increased risk for cardiac disease and hematologic malignancies, prompting investigators in other trials to consider anthracycline-free regimens.
“As the number of long-term survivors, elderly patients, and patients with preexisting cardiac risk factors increases, the toxicity profile becomes a more important discriminator in adjuvant treatment selection,” they wrote.
The investigators enrolled and randomized 2,449 women (median age 55, range 25-77 years) who had histologically confirmed, unilateral primary invasive breast cancer, adequate surgical treatment, and no evidence of metastatic disease. The patients all had HER2-negative disease, pT1 to pT4c, known hormone receptor status, and either pN+ or pN0 with one or more risk factors.
The intention-to-treat analysis included 1,227 patients assigned to EC-T and 1,222 assigned to TC in the efficacy population, and 1,167 and 1,178 patients, respectively, in the safety population.
After a median follow-up of 60 months, the 5-year DFS rate in the TC-treated group was 89.6%, compared with 89.9% in the EC-T–treated group. The estimated 5-year dRFI rates were 94.1% vs. 93.4%, and the estimated 5-year OS rates were 94.7% vs. 94.5%, respectively. None of the comparisons were statistically significant.
There were five treatment-related deaths in the TC arm, (one each from urosepsis, Streptococcus septicemia, peritonitis/diverticulitis, Staphylococcus epidermidis septicemia, and pulmonary embolism), and one in the EC-T arm (from septicemia).
In an interim safety analysis, the rate of febrile neutropenia was 6.1% in the TC arm and 3.9% in the EC-T arm, leading to a recommendation for “generous” prophylaxis with granulocyte-colony stimulating factor, and ciprofloxacine for patients with a history of diverticulitis or chronic infectious GI disease, or expected duration of neutropenia greater than 1 week.
Rates of grade 3 or 4 leukopenia, neutropenia, nausea, vomiting, peripheral polyneuropathy, hand-foot syndrome, mucositis/stomatitis, arthralgia, myalgia, and fatigue were significantly higher among patients treated with EC-T. There were numerically more grade 3-4 infections and febrile neutropenia within the TC arm, but this trend did not reach statistical significance.
The investigators noted that the results of their trial provide the strongest evidence for patients with pathologic NO or N1 disease, and that the trial did not examine the question of dose-dense chemotherapy in patients with high-risk early breast cancer.
Genomic Health, Sanofi, and Amgen supported the study. Dr. Nitz and multiple coauthors disclosed financial relationships with these companies and others.
SOURCE: Nitz U et al. J Clin Oncol. 2019 Feb 20. doi: 10.1200/JCO.18.00028.
It appears to be safe to hold the anthracycline in patients with HER2-negative early breast cancer who are at intermediate-to-high genomic risk, results of a large randomized trial suggest.
Among both pre- and postmenopausal women with pathologic stage T1 to T4c with positive nodes or node-negative but high-risk early breast cancer, there were no significant differences in 5-year outcomes for patients treated with six cycles of docetaxel and cyclophosphamide (TC) or four cycles of epirubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by four cycles of docetaxel (EC-T), reported Ulrike Nitz, MD, from the West German Study Group in Mönchengladbach, Germany, and her colleagues in the West German Study PlanB Trial.
Disease-free survival (DFS, the primary endpoint), distant recurrence-free interval (dRFI), and overall survival (OS) “were excellent and virtually identical in patients who received the anthracycline-containing or the anthracycline-free regimen. Subgroups that benefited from the anthracycline-containing regimen were not identified by interaction analysis, although a potentially clinically relevant benefit in particular (e.g., high-risk) subgroups cannot be ruled out,” they wrote. The report is in Journal of Clinical Oncology.
The investigators noted that anthracyclines are associated with increased risk for cardiac disease and hematologic malignancies, prompting investigators in other trials to consider anthracycline-free regimens.
“As the number of long-term survivors, elderly patients, and patients with preexisting cardiac risk factors increases, the toxicity profile becomes a more important discriminator in adjuvant treatment selection,” they wrote.
The investigators enrolled and randomized 2,449 women (median age 55, range 25-77 years) who had histologically confirmed, unilateral primary invasive breast cancer, adequate surgical treatment, and no evidence of metastatic disease. The patients all had HER2-negative disease, pT1 to pT4c, known hormone receptor status, and either pN+ or pN0 with one or more risk factors.
The intention-to-treat analysis included 1,227 patients assigned to EC-T and 1,222 assigned to TC in the efficacy population, and 1,167 and 1,178 patients, respectively, in the safety population.
After a median follow-up of 60 months, the 5-year DFS rate in the TC-treated group was 89.6%, compared with 89.9% in the EC-T–treated group. The estimated 5-year dRFI rates were 94.1% vs. 93.4%, and the estimated 5-year OS rates were 94.7% vs. 94.5%, respectively. None of the comparisons were statistically significant.
There were five treatment-related deaths in the TC arm, (one each from urosepsis, Streptococcus septicemia, peritonitis/diverticulitis, Staphylococcus epidermidis septicemia, and pulmonary embolism), and one in the EC-T arm (from septicemia).
In an interim safety analysis, the rate of febrile neutropenia was 6.1% in the TC arm and 3.9% in the EC-T arm, leading to a recommendation for “generous” prophylaxis with granulocyte-colony stimulating factor, and ciprofloxacine for patients with a history of diverticulitis or chronic infectious GI disease, or expected duration of neutropenia greater than 1 week.
Rates of grade 3 or 4 leukopenia, neutropenia, nausea, vomiting, peripheral polyneuropathy, hand-foot syndrome, mucositis/stomatitis, arthralgia, myalgia, and fatigue were significantly higher among patients treated with EC-T. There were numerically more grade 3-4 infections and febrile neutropenia within the TC arm, but this trend did not reach statistical significance.
The investigators noted that the results of their trial provide the strongest evidence for patients with pathologic NO or N1 disease, and that the trial did not examine the question of dose-dense chemotherapy in patients with high-risk early breast cancer.
Genomic Health, Sanofi, and Amgen supported the study. Dr. Nitz and multiple coauthors disclosed financial relationships with these companies and others.
SOURCE: Nitz U et al. J Clin Oncol. 2019 Feb 20. doi: 10.1200/JCO.18.00028.
It appears to be safe to hold the anthracycline in patients with HER2-negative early breast cancer who are at intermediate-to-high genomic risk, results of a large randomized trial suggest.
Among both pre- and postmenopausal women with pathologic stage T1 to T4c with positive nodes or node-negative but high-risk early breast cancer, there were no significant differences in 5-year outcomes for patients treated with six cycles of docetaxel and cyclophosphamide (TC) or four cycles of epirubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by four cycles of docetaxel (EC-T), reported Ulrike Nitz, MD, from the West German Study Group in Mönchengladbach, Germany, and her colleagues in the West German Study PlanB Trial.
Disease-free survival (DFS, the primary endpoint), distant recurrence-free interval (dRFI), and overall survival (OS) “were excellent and virtually identical in patients who received the anthracycline-containing or the anthracycline-free regimen. Subgroups that benefited from the anthracycline-containing regimen were not identified by interaction analysis, although a potentially clinically relevant benefit in particular (e.g., high-risk) subgroups cannot be ruled out,” they wrote. The report is in Journal of Clinical Oncology.
The investigators noted that anthracyclines are associated with increased risk for cardiac disease and hematologic malignancies, prompting investigators in other trials to consider anthracycline-free regimens.
“As the number of long-term survivors, elderly patients, and patients with preexisting cardiac risk factors increases, the toxicity profile becomes a more important discriminator in adjuvant treatment selection,” they wrote.
The investigators enrolled and randomized 2,449 women (median age 55, range 25-77 years) who had histologically confirmed, unilateral primary invasive breast cancer, adequate surgical treatment, and no evidence of metastatic disease. The patients all had HER2-negative disease, pT1 to pT4c, known hormone receptor status, and either pN+ or pN0 with one or more risk factors.
The intention-to-treat analysis included 1,227 patients assigned to EC-T and 1,222 assigned to TC in the efficacy population, and 1,167 and 1,178 patients, respectively, in the safety population.
After a median follow-up of 60 months, the 5-year DFS rate in the TC-treated group was 89.6%, compared with 89.9% in the EC-T–treated group. The estimated 5-year dRFI rates were 94.1% vs. 93.4%, and the estimated 5-year OS rates were 94.7% vs. 94.5%, respectively. None of the comparisons were statistically significant.
There were five treatment-related deaths in the TC arm, (one each from urosepsis, Streptococcus septicemia, peritonitis/diverticulitis, Staphylococcus epidermidis septicemia, and pulmonary embolism), and one in the EC-T arm (from septicemia).
In an interim safety analysis, the rate of febrile neutropenia was 6.1% in the TC arm and 3.9% in the EC-T arm, leading to a recommendation for “generous” prophylaxis with granulocyte-colony stimulating factor, and ciprofloxacine for patients with a history of diverticulitis or chronic infectious GI disease, or expected duration of neutropenia greater than 1 week.
Rates of grade 3 or 4 leukopenia, neutropenia, nausea, vomiting, peripheral polyneuropathy, hand-foot syndrome, mucositis/stomatitis, arthralgia, myalgia, and fatigue were significantly higher among patients treated with EC-T. There were numerically more grade 3-4 infections and febrile neutropenia within the TC arm, but this trend did not reach statistical significance.
The investigators noted that the results of their trial provide the strongest evidence for patients with pathologic NO or N1 disease, and that the trial did not examine the question of dose-dense chemotherapy in patients with high-risk early breast cancer.
Genomic Health, Sanofi, and Amgen supported the study. Dr. Nitz and multiple coauthors disclosed financial relationships with these companies and others.
SOURCE: Nitz U et al. J Clin Oncol. 2019 Feb 20. doi: 10.1200/JCO.18.00028.
FROM JOURNAL of CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
Rare, aggressive NSCLC type yields to pembrolizumab
SAN FRANCISCO – The immune checkpoint inhibitor pembrolizumab (Keytruda) was associated in a small case series with remarkable overall and progression-free survival of patients with pulmonary sarcomatoid carcinoma (PSC), a rare variant of non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with a grim prognosis.
Among five patients with PSC, three of whom were treatment naive, none experienced disease progression on pembrolizumab after a median follow-up of 13 months – although one died from a fungal infection unrelated to therapy – with the longest overall survival to date out to 33 months.
In contrast, patients with PSC treated before the advent of immunotherapy had a median progression-free survival of just 2 months and median overall survival a brief 4-6 months, reported Vineeth Sukrithan, MD, and his colleagues at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New York.
“It’s a uniquely enriched population of patients with lung cancer that have the best prognosis in terms of benefits from checkpoint inhibitors,” he said in an interview at the ASCO-SITC Clinical Immuno-Oncology Symposium.
PSC, a poorly differentiated subtype of NSCLC, accounts for about 0.3%-1.3% of all cases of lung cancer. It is closely associated with a history of heavy cigarette smoking and is rapidly fatal, with a poor response to conventional chemotherapy, although approximately 20% of patients with PSC have MET exon 14–skipping mutations that are “exquisitely” sensitive to crizotinib (Xalkori), Dr. Sukrithan explained.
PSC tumors are also unique in that they have extraordinarily high levels of programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1), the target of immune checkpoint inhibitors, with tumor proportion scores exceeding 90% in some cases.
Additionally, up to 43% of PSC tumors have been found to have a high mutational burden, with more than 10 mutations per megabase, suggesting that these tumors may be especially attractive targets for checkpoint inhibitor therapy, he said.
The investigators retrospectively studied surgical pathology and treatment records for all patients with advanced PSC diagnosed at their center from June 2015 to June 2018 who received pembrolizumab. They performed immunohistochemistry testing on tissue samples from the patients to quantify PD-L1 expression.
They compared the results with a cohort of patients with advanced PSC diagnosed from June 2012 to June 2015, prior to the clinical availability of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitors.
The PD-L1-treated cohort included two men and three women, ranging from 48 to 67 years, with smoking pack-years ranging from 24 to 50. Two of the patients had received prior chemotherapy followed by pembrolizumab, and the remaining three received pembrolizumab monotherapy.
Tumor proportion scores ranged from more than 75% of tumor cells examined in one patient to 100% of cells in another.
The objective response rate to pembrolizumab was 80% consisting of one complete response and three partial responses. The fifth patient continued to have stable disease out to more than 17 months.
“This highly treatment-refractory disease now should be carefully assessed for immuno-oncologic and molecularly targeted options, which are associated with significant improvement in outcomes,” the investigators wrote in a poster presentation.
The study was internally funded. Dr. Sukrithan reported having no disclosures.
SOURCE: Sukrithan V et al. ASCO-SITC, Abstract 115.
SAN FRANCISCO – The immune checkpoint inhibitor pembrolizumab (Keytruda) was associated in a small case series with remarkable overall and progression-free survival of patients with pulmonary sarcomatoid carcinoma (PSC), a rare variant of non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with a grim prognosis.
Among five patients with PSC, three of whom were treatment naive, none experienced disease progression on pembrolizumab after a median follow-up of 13 months – although one died from a fungal infection unrelated to therapy – with the longest overall survival to date out to 33 months.
In contrast, patients with PSC treated before the advent of immunotherapy had a median progression-free survival of just 2 months and median overall survival a brief 4-6 months, reported Vineeth Sukrithan, MD, and his colleagues at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New York.
“It’s a uniquely enriched population of patients with lung cancer that have the best prognosis in terms of benefits from checkpoint inhibitors,” he said in an interview at the ASCO-SITC Clinical Immuno-Oncology Symposium.
PSC, a poorly differentiated subtype of NSCLC, accounts for about 0.3%-1.3% of all cases of lung cancer. It is closely associated with a history of heavy cigarette smoking and is rapidly fatal, with a poor response to conventional chemotherapy, although approximately 20% of patients with PSC have MET exon 14–skipping mutations that are “exquisitely” sensitive to crizotinib (Xalkori), Dr. Sukrithan explained.
PSC tumors are also unique in that they have extraordinarily high levels of programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1), the target of immune checkpoint inhibitors, with tumor proportion scores exceeding 90% in some cases.
Additionally, up to 43% of PSC tumors have been found to have a high mutational burden, with more than 10 mutations per megabase, suggesting that these tumors may be especially attractive targets for checkpoint inhibitor therapy, he said.
The investigators retrospectively studied surgical pathology and treatment records for all patients with advanced PSC diagnosed at their center from June 2015 to June 2018 who received pembrolizumab. They performed immunohistochemistry testing on tissue samples from the patients to quantify PD-L1 expression.
They compared the results with a cohort of patients with advanced PSC diagnosed from June 2012 to June 2015, prior to the clinical availability of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitors.
The PD-L1-treated cohort included two men and three women, ranging from 48 to 67 years, with smoking pack-years ranging from 24 to 50. Two of the patients had received prior chemotherapy followed by pembrolizumab, and the remaining three received pembrolizumab monotherapy.
Tumor proportion scores ranged from more than 75% of tumor cells examined in one patient to 100% of cells in another.
The objective response rate to pembrolizumab was 80% consisting of one complete response and three partial responses. The fifth patient continued to have stable disease out to more than 17 months.
“This highly treatment-refractory disease now should be carefully assessed for immuno-oncologic and molecularly targeted options, which are associated with significant improvement in outcomes,” the investigators wrote in a poster presentation.
The study was internally funded. Dr. Sukrithan reported having no disclosures.
SOURCE: Sukrithan V et al. ASCO-SITC, Abstract 115.
SAN FRANCISCO – The immune checkpoint inhibitor pembrolizumab (Keytruda) was associated in a small case series with remarkable overall and progression-free survival of patients with pulmonary sarcomatoid carcinoma (PSC), a rare variant of non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with a grim prognosis.
Among five patients with PSC, three of whom were treatment naive, none experienced disease progression on pembrolizumab after a median follow-up of 13 months – although one died from a fungal infection unrelated to therapy – with the longest overall survival to date out to 33 months.
In contrast, patients with PSC treated before the advent of immunotherapy had a median progression-free survival of just 2 months and median overall survival a brief 4-6 months, reported Vineeth Sukrithan, MD, and his colleagues at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New York.
“It’s a uniquely enriched population of patients with lung cancer that have the best prognosis in terms of benefits from checkpoint inhibitors,” he said in an interview at the ASCO-SITC Clinical Immuno-Oncology Symposium.
PSC, a poorly differentiated subtype of NSCLC, accounts for about 0.3%-1.3% of all cases of lung cancer. It is closely associated with a history of heavy cigarette smoking and is rapidly fatal, with a poor response to conventional chemotherapy, although approximately 20% of patients with PSC have MET exon 14–skipping mutations that are “exquisitely” sensitive to crizotinib (Xalkori), Dr. Sukrithan explained.
PSC tumors are also unique in that they have extraordinarily high levels of programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1), the target of immune checkpoint inhibitors, with tumor proportion scores exceeding 90% in some cases.
Additionally, up to 43% of PSC tumors have been found to have a high mutational burden, with more than 10 mutations per megabase, suggesting that these tumors may be especially attractive targets for checkpoint inhibitor therapy, he said.
The investigators retrospectively studied surgical pathology and treatment records for all patients with advanced PSC diagnosed at their center from June 2015 to June 2018 who received pembrolizumab. They performed immunohistochemistry testing on tissue samples from the patients to quantify PD-L1 expression.
They compared the results with a cohort of patients with advanced PSC diagnosed from June 2012 to June 2015, prior to the clinical availability of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitors.
The PD-L1-treated cohort included two men and three women, ranging from 48 to 67 years, with smoking pack-years ranging from 24 to 50. Two of the patients had received prior chemotherapy followed by pembrolizumab, and the remaining three received pembrolizumab monotherapy.
Tumor proportion scores ranged from more than 75% of tumor cells examined in one patient to 100% of cells in another.
The objective response rate to pembrolizumab was 80% consisting of one complete response and three partial responses. The fifth patient continued to have stable disease out to more than 17 months.
“This highly treatment-refractory disease now should be carefully assessed for immuno-oncologic and molecularly targeted options, which are associated with significant improvement in outcomes,” the investigators wrote in a poster presentation.
The study was internally funded. Dr. Sukrithan reported having no disclosures.
SOURCE: Sukrithan V et al. ASCO-SITC, Abstract 115.
REPORTING FROM ASCO-SITC
Myeloma therapies raise cardiovascular risks
WASHINGTON – Proteasome inhibitors are essential components of therapeutic regimens for multiple myeloma, but at least one member of this class of life-extending agents, carfilzomib (Kyprolis), is also associated with a significant increase in risk of heart failure, cautioned a specialist in plasma cell disorders.
In addition, immunomodulating agents such as lenalidomide (Revlimid) and pomalidomide (Pomalyst) are associated with increased risk for thromboembolic events, said R. Frank Cornell, MD, clinical director of plasma cell disorders at Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, Tenn.
In an ongoing, prospective study comparing rates of cardiac adverse events in patients receiving carfilzomib or another proteasome inhibitor, bortezomib (Velcade), Dr. Cornell and his colleagues found that while there were no significant differences in progression-free survival (PFS) or overall survival (OS) between the treatments, “patients who experienced a cardiovascular event had significantly worse progression-free and overall survival compared to those that did not have a cardiovascular event,” he said at the American College of Cardiology’s Advancing the Cardiovascular Care of the Oncology Patient meeting.
The Prospective Observation of Cardiac Safety With Proteasome Inhibition (PROTECT) trial, scheduled for completion in August 2019, enrolled 95 patients with relapsed multiple myeloma and randomly assigned them on a 2:1 basis to receive carfilzomib or bortezomib.
The investigators found that cardiovascular adverse events occurred in 33 of the 65 patients (51%) randomized to carfilzomib, compared with 5 of 30 patients (17%) assigned to bortezomib.
The events included grade 1 or 2 heart failure (HF) in 12 patients on carfilzomib vs. 2 on bortezomib, and grade 3 or 4 HF in 11 vs. 1, respectively. Hypertension was significantly more frequent among patients on carfilzomib, and one patient on carfilzomib died from the acute coronary syndrome 24 hours after receiving carfilzomib in the second week of treatment.
The investigators found that both B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) and N-terminal pro b-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) were highly predictive of cardiovascular adverse events. Patients on carfilzomib who had levels of the markers above normal at baseline had an odds ratio (OR) for cardiovascular events of 7.39 (P less than .0001), and those with BNP or NT-proBNP increases at week 2 or 3 during cycle 1 had an OR for a cardiovascular adverse event of 63.5 (P less than .001).
In multivariate analysis, the risk for cardiovascular events for patients treated with carfilzomib was significantly lower for patients with one or no traditional cardiovascular risk factors, compared with patients with two or more.
“Prospective monitoring with natriuretic peptides should be considered, particularly early in treatment,” Dr. Cornell said.
IMiDs and thromboembolism
In early clinical trials of immunomodulators (IMiDs) for multiple myeloma, investigators saw that the incidence of thromboembolic events was lower among patients who received thromboprophylaxis than among those who did not, Dr. Cornell noted.
“From this, certain guidelines have been developed such that all patients considered to be at risk should at least receive an aspirin, 81-325 mg, and patients at higher risk for thromboembolism should receive low-molecular-weight heparin or therapeutic-dose warfarin,” he said.
There is little guidance, however, about the use of direct oral anticoagulants in this population, he added, a fact that prompted him and his colleagues in oncology and cardiology to perform a pilot study of apixaban (Eliquis) for primary prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with multiple myeloma who were receiving immunodulatory drugs.
Results of the pilot study, reported in a poster session at the 2018 annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology, showed that among 50 patients who received apixaban 2.5 mg twice daily for 6 months during IMiD therapy, there were no VTEs, stroke, or myocardial infarction, and no episodes of major bleeding. There were just three nonmajor bleeding events, and one early withdrawal from apixaban due to an allergic reaction manifesting as generalized edema.
“Further study is needed to validate this as a potential primary prophylaxis in patients receiving IMiDs for multiple myeloma,” Dr. Cornell said.
He reported having no financial disclosures. Millennium Pharmaceuticals is a sponsor of the PROTECT trial.
WASHINGTON – Proteasome inhibitors are essential components of therapeutic regimens for multiple myeloma, but at least one member of this class of life-extending agents, carfilzomib (Kyprolis), is also associated with a significant increase in risk of heart failure, cautioned a specialist in plasma cell disorders.
In addition, immunomodulating agents such as lenalidomide (Revlimid) and pomalidomide (Pomalyst) are associated with increased risk for thromboembolic events, said R. Frank Cornell, MD, clinical director of plasma cell disorders at Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, Tenn.
In an ongoing, prospective study comparing rates of cardiac adverse events in patients receiving carfilzomib or another proteasome inhibitor, bortezomib (Velcade), Dr. Cornell and his colleagues found that while there were no significant differences in progression-free survival (PFS) or overall survival (OS) between the treatments, “patients who experienced a cardiovascular event had significantly worse progression-free and overall survival compared to those that did not have a cardiovascular event,” he said at the American College of Cardiology’s Advancing the Cardiovascular Care of the Oncology Patient meeting.
The Prospective Observation of Cardiac Safety With Proteasome Inhibition (PROTECT) trial, scheduled for completion in August 2019, enrolled 95 patients with relapsed multiple myeloma and randomly assigned them on a 2:1 basis to receive carfilzomib or bortezomib.
The investigators found that cardiovascular adverse events occurred in 33 of the 65 patients (51%) randomized to carfilzomib, compared with 5 of 30 patients (17%) assigned to bortezomib.
The events included grade 1 or 2 heart failure (HF) in 12 patients on carfilzomib vs. 2 on bortezomib, and grade 3 or 4 HF in 11 vs. 1, respectively. Hypertension was significantly more frequent among patients on carfilzomib, and one patient on carfilzomib died from the acute coronary syndrome 24 hours after receiving carfilzomib in the second week of treatment.
The investigators found that both B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) and N-terminal pro b-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) were highly predictive of cardiovascular adverse events. Patients on carfilzomib who had levels of the markers above normal at baseline had an odds ratio (OR) for cardiovascular events of 7.39 (P less than .0001), and those with BNP or NT-proBNP increases at week 2 or 3 during cycle 1 had an OR for a cardiovascular adverse event of 63.5 (P less than .001).
In multivariate analysis, the risk for cardiovascular events for patients treated with carfilzomib was significantly lower for patients with one or no traditional cardiovascular risk factors, compared with patients with two or more.
“Prospective monitoring with natriuretic peptides should be considered, particularly early in treatment,” Dr. Cornell said.
IMiDs and thromboembolism
In early clinical trials of immunomodulators (IMiDs) for multiple myeloma, investigators saw that the incidence of thromboembolic events was lower among patients who received thromboprophylaxis than among those who did not, Dr. Cornell noted.
“From this, certain guidelines have been developed such that all patients considered to be at risk should at least receive an aspirin, 81-325 mg, and patients at higher risk for thromboembolism should receive low-molecular-weight heparin or therapeutic-dose warfarin,” he said.
There is little guidance, however, about the use of direct oral anticoagulants in this population, he added, a fact that prompted him and his colleagues in oncology and cardiology to perform a pilot study of apixaban (Eliquis) for primary prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with multiple myeloma who were receiving immunodulatory drugs.
Results of the pilot study, reported in a poster session at the 2018 annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology, showed that among 50 patients who received apixaban 2.5 mg twice daily for 6 months during IMiD therapy, there were no VTEs, stroke, or myocardial infarction, and no episodes of major bleeding. There were just three nonmajor bleeding events, and one early withdrawal from apixaban due to an allergic reaction manifesting as generalized edema.
“Further study is needed to validate this as a potential primary prophylaxis in patients receiving IMiDs for multiple myeloma,” Dr. Cornell said.
He reported having no financial disclosures. Millennium Pharmaceuticals is a sponsor of the PROTECT trial.
WASHINGTON – Proteasome inhibitors are essential components of therapeutic regimens for multiple myeloma, but at least one member of this class of life-extending agents, carfilzomib (Kyprolis), is also associated with a significant increase in risk of heart failure, cautioned a specialist in plasma cell disorders.
In addition, immunomodulating agents such as lenalidomide (Revlimid) and pomalidomide (Pomalyst) are associated with increased risk for thromboembolic events, said R. Frank Cornell, MD, clinical director of plasma cell disorders at Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, Tenn.
In an ongoing, prospective study comparing rates of cardiac adverse events in patients receiving carfilzomib or another proteasome inhibitor, bortezomib (Velcade), Dr. Cornell and his colleagues found that while there were no significant differences in progression-free survival (PFS) or overall survival (OS) between the treatments, “patients who experienced a cardiovascular event had significantly worse progression-free and overall survival compared to those that did not have a cardiovascular event,” he said at the American College of Cardiology’s Advancing the Cardiovascular Care of the Oncology Patient meeting.
The Prospective Observation of Cardiac Safety With Proteasome Inhibition (PROTECT) trial, scheduled for completion in August 2019, enrolled 95 patients with relapsed multiple myeloma and randomly assigned them on a 2:1 basis to receive carfilzomib or bortezomib.
The investigators found that cardiovascular adverse events occurred in 33 of the 65 patients (51%) randomized to carfilzomib, compared with 5 of 30 patients (17%) assigned to bortezomib.
The events included grade 1 or 2 heart failure (HF) in 12 patients on carfilzomib vs. 2 on bortezomib, and grade 3 or 4 HF in 11 vs. 1, respectively. Hypertension was significantly more frequent among patients on carfilzomib, and one patient on carfilzomib died from the acute coronary syndrome 24 hours after receiving carfilzomib in the second week of treatment.
The investigators found that both B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) and N-terminal pro b-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) were highly predictive of cardiovascular adverse events. Patients on carfilzomib who had levels of the markers above normal at baseline had an odds ratio (OR) for cardiovascular events of 7.39 (P less than .0001), and those with BNP or NT-proBNP increases at week 2 or 3 during cycle 1 had an OR for a cardiovascular adverse event of 63.5 (P less than .001).
In multivariate analysis, the risk for cardiovascular events for patients treated with carfilzomib was significantly lower for patients with one or no traditional cardiovascular risk factors, compared with patients with two or more.
“Prospective monitoring with natriuretic peptides should be considered, particularly early in treatment,” Dr. Cornell said.
IMiDs and thromboembolism
In early clinical trials of immunomodulators (IMiDs) for multiple myeloma, investigators saw that the incidence of thromboembolic events was lower among patients who received thromboprophylaxis than among those who did not, Dr. Cornell noted.
“From this, certain guidelines have been developed such that all patients considered to be at risk should at least receive an aspirin, 81-325 mg, and patients at higher risk for thromboembolism should receive low-molecular-weight heparin or therapeutic-dose warfarin,” he said.
There is little guidance, however, about the use of direct oral anticoagulants in this population, he added, a fact that prompted him and his colleagues in oncology and cardiology to perform a pilot study of apixaban (Eliquis) for primary prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with multiple myeloma who were receiving immunodulatory drugs.
Results of the pilot study, reported in a poster session at the 2018 annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology, showed that among 50 patients who received apixaban 2.5 mg twice daily for 6 months during IMiD therapy, there were no VTEs, stroke, or myocardial infarction, and no episodes of major bleeding. There were just three nonmajor bleeding events, and one early withdrawal from apixaban due to an allergic reaction manifesting as generalized edema.
“Further study is needed to validate this as a potential primary prophylaxis in patients receiving IMiDs for multiple myeloma,” Dr. Cornell said.
He reported having no financial disclosures. Millennium Pharmaceuticals is a sponsor of the PROTECT trial.
REPORTING FROM ACC CARDIO-ONCOLOGY
Durable responses to ADC sacituzumab in mTNBC
The novel antibody-drug conjugate sacituzumab govitecan was associated with durable clinical responses in one third of patients with heavily pretreated metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), investigators in a multicenter study found.
Among a cohort of 108 patients with TNBC, the objective response rate (ORR) to treatment with sacituzumab govitecan was 33.3%, which included three complete and 33 partial responses (CR and PR), with a median duration of response of 7.7 months, reported Aditya Bardia, MD, from Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston and his colleagues.
“The duration of treatment with sacituzumab govitecan-hziy was longer than with the immediate previous antitumor therapy (5.1 months vs. 2.5 months); this provides further evidence of clinical activity in patients with difficult-to-treat metastatic triple-negative breast,” they wrote in The New England Journal of Medicine.
Sacituzumab govitecan (the suffix “hziy” used in the article is not sanctioned by the FDA, according to an editor’s note) is an antibody-drug conjugate consisting of SN-38, the active metabolite of the topoisomerase I inhibitor irinotecan, linked to a humanized monoclonal antibody targeted to Trop-2, a cell-surface glycoprotein expressed in triple-negative breast cancers and most other epithelial malignancies.
The study, preliminary results of which were previously reported at the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium in 2017, was part of a larger a phase 1/2 basket trial that resulted in sacituzumab govitecan receiving a breakthrough designation from the Food and Drug Administration.
The breast cancer cohort included 108 patients (107 women and one man; median age, 55 years) with TNBC who had received a median of 3 prior lines of anticancer therapies. Most had received taxanes (98%) and anthracyclines (86%).
At the time of data cutoff on December 1, 2017, the median duration of follow-up was 9.7 months. By that time, 100 of the 108 patients had discontinued therapy: 86 because of disease progression, three because of adverse events, 7 at the investigator’s discretion, and 2 for withdrawal of consent.
Four patients died during treatment; all of the deaths were judged to be caused by disease progression.
Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurring in 10% or more of patients included neutropenia in 42% and anemia in 11%. Febrile neutropenia occurred in 9.3% of patients.
As noted before, the investigator-assessed ORR was 33.3%, and the median duration of response was 7.7 months. The ORR as assessed by independent central reviewers was 34.7%, and the median duration of response 9.1%. The clinical benefit rate, a composite of ORR plus stable disease of at a least 6 months duration, was 45.4%. The median progression-free survival was 5.5 months, and median overall survival was 13 months.
There were no significant differences in outcomes in a subgroup analysis broken down by patient age, metastatic disease, number of prior therapies, or presence of visceral metastases, the investigators noted, but they cautioned that the numbers were small, which led to wide confidence intervals, “and thus the homogeneity of clinical outcomes observed in these subgroups is weak and should be interpreted with caution,” they wrote.
The study was supported by Immunomedics. Dr. Bardia disclosed advisory board activities and institutional research grants from Immunomedics, Sanofi, and Radius Health. Multiple coauthors reported similar relationships with these and other companies.
SOURCE: Bardia A et al. NEJM 2019 Feb 20. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1814213.
The novel antibody-drug conjugate sacituzumab govitecan was associated with durable clinical responses in one third of patients with heavily pretreated metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), investigators in a multicenter study found.
Among a cohort of 108 patients with TNBC, the objective response rate (ORR) to treatment with sacituzumab govitecan was 33.3%, which included three complete and 33 partial responses (CR and PR), with a median duration of response of 7.7 months, reported Aditya Bardia, MD, from Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston and his colleagues.
“The duration of treatment with sacituzumab govitecan-hziy was longer than with the immediate previous antitumor therapy (5.1 months vs. 2.5 months); this provides further evidence of clinical activity in patients with difficult-to-treat metastatic triple-negative breast,” they wrote in The New England Journal of Medicine.
Sacituzumab govitecan (the suffix “hziy” used in the article is not sanctioned by the FDA, according to an editor’s note) is an antibody-drug conjugate consisting of SN-38, the active metabolite of the topoisomerase I inhibitor irinotecan, linked to a humanized monoclonal antibody targeted to Trop-2, a cell-surface glycoprotein expressed in triple-negative breast cancers and most other epithelial malignancies.
The study, preliminary results of which were previously reported at the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium in 2017, was part of a larger a phase 1/2 basket trial that resulted in sacituzumab govitecan receiving a breakthrough designation from the Food and Drug Administration.
The breast cancer cohort included 108 patients (107 women and one man; median age, 55 years) with TNBC who had received a median of 3 prior lines of anticancer therapies. Most had received taxanes (98%) and anthracyclines (86%).
At the time of data cutoff on December 1, 2017, the median duration of follow-up was 9.7 months. By that time, 100 of the 108 patients had discontinued therapy: 86 because of disease progression, three because of adverse events, 7 at the investigator’s discretion, and 2 for withdrawal of consent.
Four patients died during treatment; all of the deaths were judged to be caused by disease progression.
Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurring in 10% or more of patients included neutropenia in 42% and anemia in 11%. Febrile neutropenia occurred in 9.3% of patients.
As noted before, the investigator-assessed ORR was 33.3%, and the median duration of response was 7.7 months. The ORR as assessed by independent central reviewers was 34.7%, and the median duration of response 9.1%. The clinical benefit rate, a composite of ORR plus stable disease of at a least 6 months duration, was 45.4%. The median progression-free survival was 5.5 months, and median overall survival was 13 months.
There were no significant differences in outcomes in a subgroup analysis broken down by patient age, metastatic disease, number of prior therapies, or presence of visceral metastases, the investigators noted, but they cautioned that the numbers were small, which led to wide confidence intervals, “and thus the homogeneity of clinical outcomes observed in these subgroups is weak and should be interpreted with caution,” they wrote.
The study was supported by Immunomedics. Dr. Bardia disclosed advisory board activities and institutional research grants from Immunomedics, Sanofi, and Radius Health. Multiple coauthors reported similar relationships with these and other companies.
SOURCE: Bardia A et al. NEJM 2019 Feb 20. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1814213.
The novel antibody-drug conjugate sacituzumab govitecan was associated with durable clinical responses in one third of patients with heavily pretreated metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), investigators in a multicenter study found.
Among a cohort of 108 patients with TNBC, the objective response rate (ORR) to treatment with sacituzumab govitecan was 33.3%, which included three complete and 33 partial responses (CR and PR), with a median duration of response of 7.7 months, reported Aditya Bardia, MD, from Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston and his colleagues.
“The duration of treatment with sacituzumab govitecan-hziy was longer than with the immediate previous antitumor therapy (5.1 months vs. 2.5 months); this provides further evidence of clinical activity in patients with difficult-to-treat metastatic triple-negative breast,” they wrote in The New England Journal of Medicine.
Sacituzumab govitecan (the suffix “hziy” used in the article is not sanctioned by the FDA, according to an editor’s note) is an antibody-drug conjugate consisting of SN-38, the active metabolite of the topoisomerase I inhibitor irinotecan, linked to a humanized monoclonal antibody targeted to Trop-2, a cell-surface glycoprotein expressed in triple-negative breast cancers and most other epithelial malignancies.
The study, preliminary results of which were previously reported at the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium in 2017, was part of a larger a phase 1/2 basket trial that resulted in sacituzumab govitecan receiving a breakthrough designation from the Food and Drug Administration.
The breast cancer cohort included 108 patients (107 women and one man; median age, 55 years) with TNBC who had received a median of 3 prior lines of anticancer therapies. Most had received taxanes (98%) and anthracyclines (86%).
At the time of data cutoff on December 1, 2017, the median duration of follow-up was 9.7 months. By that time, 100 of the 108 patients had discontinued therapy: 86 because of disease progression, three because of adverse events, 7 at the investigator’s discretion, and 2 for withdrawal of consent.
Four patients died during treatment; all of the deaths were judged to be caused by disease progression.
Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurring in 10% or more of patients included neutropenia in 42% and anemia in 11%. Febrile neutropenia occurred in 9.3% of patients.
As noted before, the investigator-assessed ORR was 33.3%, and the median duration of response was 7.7 months. The ORR as assessed by independent central reviewers was 34.7%, and the median duration of response 9.1%. The clinical benefit rate, a composite of ORR plus stable disease of at a least 6 months duration, was 45.4%. The median progression-free survival was 5.5 months, and median overall survival was 13 months.
There were no significant differences in outcomes in a subgroup analysis broken down by patient age, metastatic disease, number of prior therapies, or presence of visceral metastases, the investigators noted, but they cautioned that the numbers were small, which led to wide confidence intervals, “and thus the homogeneity of clinical outcomes observed in these subgroups is weak and should be interpreted with caution,” they wrote.
The study was supported by Immunomedics. Dr. Bardia disclosed advisory board activities and institutional research grants from Immunomedics, Sanofi, and Radius Health. Multiple coauthors reported similar relationships with these and other companies.
SOURCE: Bardia A et al. NEJM 2019 Feb 20. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1814213.
FROM THE NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE
Key clinical point: Sacituzumab govitecan induced responses in patients with heavily pretreated TNBC.
Major finding: The objective response rate among 108 patients with metastatic TNBC was 33.3%.
Study details: Phase 1/2 trial cohort of 107 women and one man with advanced triple-negative breast cancer.
Disclosures: The study was supported by Immunomedics. Dr. Bardia disclosed advisory board activities with and institutional research grants from Immunomedics, Sanofi, and Radius Health. Multiple coauthors reported similar relationships with these and other companies.
Source: Bardia A et al. NEJM. 2019 Feb 20. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1814213.
Pembrolizumab extends Merkel cell PFS, OS
Patients with the aggressive skin cancer Merkel cell carcinoma who were treated with the immune checkpoint inhibitor pembrolizumab (Keytruda) in the first line had higher complete response rates, better progression-free survival, and longer overall survival than historical controls treated with cytotoxic chemotherapy.
Among 50 adults with advanced Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) with no prior systemic therapy who received pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg every 3 weeks for up to 2 years in a phase 2 clinical trial (NCT02267603), 24% had a complete response and 32% a partial response, for an overall response rate of 56%.
The 24-month overall survival rate was 68.7%, with median overall survival not reached after a median follow-up time of 14.9 months. In contrast, a retrospective study of 67 patients with MCC treated with first-line chemotherapy showed an ORR of 29.4%, a median OS of 10.5 months, and a 24-month OS of 24.5% (Future Oncol. 2017 Aug;13(19):1699-1710).
Similarly, a second retrospective study showed that, among 62 patients treated with first-line chemotherapy, the ORR was 55%, median OS was 9.5 months, and 24-month OS was 20% (Cancer Med. 2016 Sep;5(9):2294-2301), reported Paul Nghiem, MD, PhD, from the University of Washington and Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle, and his colleagues.
The rationale for using a checkpoint inhibitor for advanced MCC is that “[m]ultiple lines of evidence support the notion that MCC is an immunogenic cancer, including the fact that MCC incidence is greater than 10-fold higher in chronically immunosuppressed persons,” they wrote in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.
The current National Comprehensive Cancer Network guideline on Merkel cell carcinoma recommends the use of the programmed death–1/programmed death–ligand 1 (PD-1/PD-L1) inhibitors pembrolizumab, avelumab (Bavencio), or nivolumab (Opdivo) as preferred first-line systemic therapy for patients with disseminated disease, Dr. Nghiem and his colleagues noted.
In the current report, they presented data on the longest follow-up to date of patients with advance MCC who received a PD-1 inhibitor in the first line.
In the multicenter, phase 2 trial, 50 patients with a median age of 70.5 years were treated. Of this group, 64% had tumors positive for the Merkel cell polyomavirus and 49% had PD-L1 expression on tumor cells.
Of the 50 total patients, 28 had an objective response according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1, including 12 with a complete response and 16 with a partial response. A total of 5 patients had stable disease, 16 had progressive disease, and 1 patient died before the first on-treatment scan for assessment.
After a median follow-up of 4.9 months, the 24-month progression-free survival rate (PFS) was 48.3% months, with a median PFS of 16.8 months.
As noted before, the 24-month OS rate was 68.7% and the median OS had not been reached at the time of the analysis.
There were no significant differences in PFS or OS between patients with tumors positive or negative for the Merkel polyomavirus, and there was a nonsignificant trend toward better PFS and OS for patients whose tumors had PD-L1 expression greater than 1%.
In all, 48 of the 50 patients had a treatment-related adverse event of any kind, and 14 had grade 3 or greater events. Treatment-related events led to discontinuation of pembrolizumab for seven patients, and one patient, a 73-year-old man with metastatic MCC and atrial fibrillation, developed pericardial and pleural effusions 1 day after receiving a single pembrolizumab infusion. The patient died 10 days after receiving pembrolizumab, and his death was deemed to be related to the drug.
The investigators noted that the drug’s efficacy in patients with both polyomavirus- and UV-induced subtypes of MCC “provides compelling evidence that both the quality and quantity of tumor antigens are important factors driving antitumor immunity and tumor rejection.”
The study was supported by grants from the National Cancer Institute, the Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) patient gift fund at University of Washington, the Kelsey Dickson MCC Challenge Grant from the Prostate Cancer Foundation, and Merck, which provided pembrolizumab and partial funding. Dr. Nghiem reported receiving honoraria, travel expenses, and a consulting or advisory role from/for Merck and others. Multiple coauthors reported similar relations with Merck and/or other companies.
SOURCE: Nghiem P et al. J Clin Oncol. 2019 Feb 6. doi: 10.1200/JCO.18.01896.
Patients with the aggressive skin cancer Merkel cell carcinoma who were treated with the immune checkpoint inhibitor pembrolizumab (Keytruda) in the first line had higher complete response rates, better progression-free survival, and longer overall survival than historical controls treated with cytotoxic chemotherapy.
Among 50 adults with advanced Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) with no prior systemic therapy who received pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg every 3 weeks for up to 2 years in a phase 2 clinical trial (NCT02267603), 24% had a complete response and 32% a partial response, for an overall response rate of 56%.
The 24-month overall survival rate was 68.7%, with median overall survival not reached after a median follow-up time of 14.9 months. In contrast, a retrospective study of 67 patients with MCC treated with first-line chemotherapy showed an ORR of 29.4%, a median OS of 10.5 months, and a 24-month OS of 24.5% (Future Oncol. 2017 Aug;13(19):1699-1710).
Similarly, a second retrospective study showed that, among 62 patients treated with first-line chemotherapy, the ORR was 55%, median OS was 9.5 months, and 24-month OS was 20% (Cancer Med. 2016 Sep;5(9):2294-2301), reported Paul Nghiem, MD, PhD, from the University of Washington and Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle, and his colleagues.
The rationale for using a checkpoint inhibitor for advanced MCC is that “[m]ultiple lines of evidence support the notion that MCC is an immunogenic cancer, including the fact that MCC incidence is greater than 10-fold higher in chronically immunosuppressed persons,” they wrote in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.
The current National Comprehensive Cancer Network guideline on Merkel cell carcinoma recommends the use of the programmed death–1/programmed death–ligand 1 (PD-1/PD-L1) inhibitors pembrolizumab, avelumab (Bavencio), or nivolumab (Opdivo) as preferred first-line systemic therapy for patients with disseminated disease, Dr. Nghiem and his colleagues noted.
In the current report, they presented data on the longest follow-up to date of patients with advance MCC who received a PD-1 inhibitor in the first line.
In the multicenter, phase 2 trial, 50 patients with a median age of 70.5 years were treated. Of this group, 64% had tumors positive for the Merkel cell polyomavirus and 49% had PD-L1 expression on tumor cells.
Of the 50 total patients, 28 had an objective response according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1, including 12 with a complete response and 16 with a partial response. A total of 5 patients had stable disease, 16 had progressive disease, and 1 patient died before the first on-treatment scan for assessment.
After a median follow-up of 4.9 months, the 24-month progression-free survival rate (PFS) was 48.3% months, with a median PFS of 16.8 months.
As noted before, the 24-month OS rate was 68.7% and the median OS had not been reached at the time of the analysis.
There were no significant differences in PFS or OS between patients with tumors positive or negative for the Merkel polyomavirus, and there was a nonsignificant trend toward better PFS and OS for patients whose tumors had PD-L1 expression greater than 1%.
In all, 48 of the 50 patients had a treatment-related adverse event of any kind, and 14 had grade 3 or greater events. Treatment-related events led to discontinuation of pembrolizumab for seven patients, and one patient, a 73-year-old man with metastatic MCC and atrial fibrillation, developed pericardial and pleural effusions 1 day after receiving a single pembrolizumab infusion. The patient died 10 days after receiving pembrolizumab, and his death was deemed to be related to the drug.
The investigators noted that the drug’s efficacy in patients with both polyomavirus- and UV-induced subtypes of MCC “provides compelling evidence that both the quality and quantity of tumor antigens are important factors driving antitumor immunity and tumor rejection.”
The study was supported by grants from the National Cancer Institute, the Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) patient gift fund at University of Washington, the Kelsey Dickson MCC Challenge Grant from the Prostate Cancer Foundation, and Merck, which provided pembrolizumab and partial funding. Dr. Nghiem reported receiving honoraria, travel expenses, and a consulting or advisory role from/for Merck and others. Multiple coauthors reported similar relations with Merck and/or other companies.
SOURCE: Nghiem P et al. J Clin Oncol. 2019 Feb 6. doi: 10.1200/JCO.18.01896.
Patients with the aggressive skin cancer Merkel cell carcinoma who were treated with the immune checkpoint inhibitor pembrolizumab (Keytruda) in the first line had higher complete response rates, better progression-free survival, and longer overall survival than historical controls treated with cytotoxic chemotherapy.
Among 50 adults with advanced Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) with no prior systemic therapy who received pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg every 3 weeks for up to 2 years in a phase 2 clinical trial (NCT02267603), 24% had a complete response and 32% a partial response, for an overall response rate of 56%.
The 24-month overall survival rate was 68.7%, with median overall survival not reached after a median follow-up time of 14.9 months. In contrast, a retrospective study of 67 patients with MCC treated with first-line chemotherapy showed an ORR of 29.4%, a median OS of 10.5 months, and a 24-month OS of 24.5% (Future Oncol. 2017 Aug;13(19):1699-1710).
Similarly, a second retrospective study showed that, among 62 patients treated with first-line chemotherapy, the ORR was 55%, median OS was 9.5 months, and 24-month OS was 20% (Cancer Med. 2016 Sep;5(9):2294-2301), reported Paul Nghiem, MD, PhD, from the University of Washington and Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle, and his colleagues.
The rationale for using a checkpoint inhibitor for advanced MCC is that “[m]ultiple lines of evidence support the notion that MCC is an immunogenic cancer, including the fact that MCC incidence is greater than 10-fold higher in chronically immunosuppressed persons,” they wrote in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.
The current National Comprehensive Cancer Network guideline on Merkel cell carcinoma recommends the use of the programmed death–1/programmed death–ligand 1 (PD-1/PD-L1) inhibitors pembrolizumab, avelumab (Bavencio), or nivolumab (Opdivo) as preferred first-line systemic therapy for patients with disseminated disease, Dr. Nghiem and his colleagues noted.
In the current report, they presented data on the longest follow-up to date of patients with advance MCC who received a PD-1 inhibitor in the first line.
In the multicenter, phase 2 trial, 50 patients with a median age of 70.5 years were treated. Of this group, 64% had tumors positive for the Merkel cell polyomavirus and 49% had PD-L1 expression on tumor cells.
Of the 50 total patients, 28 had an objective response according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1, including 12 with a complete response and 16 with a partial response. A total of 5 patients had stable disease, 16 had progressive disease, and 1 patient died before the first on-treatment scan for assessment.
After a median follow-up of 4.9 months, the 24-month progression-free survival rate (PFS) was 48.3% months, with a median PFS of 16.8 months.
As noted before, the 24-month OS rate was 68.7% and the median OS had not been reached at the time of the analysis.
There were no significant differences in PFS or OS between patients with tumors positive or negative for the Merkel polyomavirus, and there was a nonsignificant trend toward better PFS and OS for patients whose tumors had PD-L1 expression greater than 1%.
In all, 48 of the 50 patients had a treatment-related adverse event of any kind, and 14 had grade 3 or greater events. Treatment-related events led to discontinuation of pembrolizumab for seven patients, and one patient, a 73-year-old man with metastatic MCC and atrial fibrillation, developed pericardial and pleural effusions 1 day after receiving a single pembrolizumab infusion. The patient died 10 days after receiving pembrolizumab, and his death was deemed to be related to the drug.
The investigators noted that the drug’s efficacy in patients with both polyomavirus- and UV-induced subtypes of MCC “provides compelling evidence that both the quality and quantity of tumor antigens are important factors driving antitumor immunity and tumor rejection.”
The study was supported by grants from the National Cancer Institute, the Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) patient gift fund at University of Washington, the Kelsey Dickson MCC Challenge Grant from the Prostate Cancer Foundation, and Merck, which provided pembrolizumab and partial funding. Dr. Nghiem reported receiving honoraria, travel expenses, and a consulting or advisory role from/for Merck and others. Multiple coauthors reported similar relations with Merck and/or other companies.
SOURCE: Nghiem P et al. J Clin Oncol. 2019 Feb 6. doi: 10.1200/JCO.18.01896.
FROM THE JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
Key clinical point: A programmed death–1/programmed death–ligand 1 inhibitor is preferred in the first line for disseminated Merkel cell carcinoma.
Major finding: Overall survival after 24 months was 68.7%, with the median overall survival not reached.
Study details: A follow-up of a phase 2, open-label trial in 50 patients with advanced Merkel cell carcinoma.
Disclosures: The study was supported by supported by grants from the National Cancer Institute, the Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) patient gift fund at University of Washington, the Kelsey Dickson MCC Challenge Grant from the Prostate Cancer Foundation, and Merck, which provided pembrolizumab and partial funding. Dr. Nghiem reported receiving honoraria, travel expenses, and a consulting or advisory role from/for Merck and others. Multiple coauthors reported similar relations with Merck and/or other companies.
Source: Nghiem P et al. J Clin Oncol. 2019 Feb 6. doi: 10.1200/JCO.18.01896.
Breast cancer recurrence lower, survival better with dose-intensified regimens
Dose-intense adjuvant chemotherapy is associated with significant if modest improvements in recurrence-free, breast cancer–specific, and overall survival among women with early breast cancer, results of a meta-analysis of data on individual patients showed.
Among more than 37,000 patients treated in 26 clinical trials with a median follow-up of 7.4 years, there was a 14% reduction in relative risk and 3.4% reduction in absolute 10-year risk of breast cancer recurrence for women who were treated either with accelerated-schedule or sequential chemotherapy, reported members of the Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (EBCTCG).
There were no differences in deaths from cardiovascular disease, acute myeloid leukemia, or other cancers between patients treated with dose-intense regimens or schedules and those treated with standard chemotherapy, although patients on dose-intense regimens had higher incidence of grade 3 or 4 anemia, and more did not complete the prescribed courses compared with standard chemotherapy, the investigators noted.
“The balance of benefit versus toxicity, therefore, appears to favor more dose-intense chemotherapy. A further advantage of 2-weekly versus 3-weekly chemotherapy – but not of sequential versus concurrent chemotherapy – is treatment is completed sooner,” they wrote in The Lancet.
The investigators examined individual patient data for 26 of 33 trials comparing either 2-weekly chemotherapy with 3-weekly therapy, or sequential vs. concurrent anthracycline and taxane-based chemotherapy.
The trials comprised a total cohort of 37,297 women randomized, most of whom were younger than 70 years at the time of diagnose and had node-positive disease.
The 10 year-risk for breast cancer recurrence, one of two primary endpoints, was 28% with dose intensification vs. 31.4% with standard dosing, translating into a first-event rate ratio (RR) for recurrence of 0.86 (P less than .0001).
Ten-year breast-cancer mortality, the other primary endpoint, was 18.9% among patients treated with dose-intensified regimens or schedules, compared with 21.3% for patients treated under standard protocols.
All-cause mortality was lower with dose intensification (22.1% vs. 24.8%, P less than .0001), and death without recurrence was also slightly but significantly lower (4.1% vs. 4.6%, respectively, P = .034).
The reductions in recurrence rates were similar among trials comparing 2-week vs. 3-week chemotherapy cycles, sequential vs. concurrent schedules, and both strategies together.
“The proportional reductions in recurrence with dose-intense chemotherapy were similar and highly significant [P less than .0001) in estrogen receptor (ER)-positive and ER-negative disease and did not differ significantly by other patient or tumor characteristics,” the investigators wrote.
“The present findings are of limited relevance to the question of which women with early breast cancer should be offered chemotherapy, although they do indicate that chemotherapy can reduce breast cancer mortality rates by 40% rather than a third. The absolute gain from this proportional reduction in recurrence depends chiefly on what the risk of distant recurrence would be without chemotherapy, which varies greatly from one woman to another, and is the subject of much ongoing research,” the investigators wrote.
“The findings are, however, directly relevant to selection of what regimen to use, and they show that, if chemotherapy is to be given, a dose-intense regimen should at least be considered,” they wrote.
The meta-analysis was funded by Cancer Research UK and the Medical Research Council. All authors reported having no relevant disclosures.
SOURCE: EBCTCG. The Lancet. 2019 Feb 7. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)33137-4.
Although these results are meaningful, several limitations should be recognized as we translate these findings into practice. First, the benefits of dose intensification have not been established in the era of targeted therapy. Given that these studies enrolled women from 1985 to 2011, HER2 status was known for only 50% of tumors. Of those tested, 16% (n = 2,994) were HER2 positive. Use of trastuzumab was not reported but was probably uncommon since adjuvant trastuzumab was not approved until 2006. The remaining 18,625 patients did not have HER2 testing; thus, no HER2-directed therapy would have been given. Therefore, the majority of patients with HER2- positive breast cancer did not receive targeted therapy.
Although the authors report that women with HER2-positive and HER2-negative disease benefit similarly from dose intensification, it is impossible to know whether dose intensification benefits trastuzumab-treated patients or those who receive more than one HER2-targeted therapy (pertuzumab, neratinib, or trastuzumab-emtansine). Similarly, if other targeted therapies such as CDK4/6 inhibitors and PARP inhibitors show significant benefit in the curative setting for high-risk estrogen receptor (ER)-positive or BRCA-mutated breast cancer, prospective studies will be required to establish whether dose-intensive chemotherapy is better than standard chemotherapy in those settings.
Second, it is premature to conclude that patients older than 70 years or those with node-negative disease benefit from dose intensification, given the small number of patients in those groups and the fact that no significant benefit was observed for these patients. Moreover, gene-expression profiling was not used in these studies; thus, the benefit, if any, of a dose-intense approach for women with lymph-node-negative, high-risk, ER-positive disease is impossible to know. Finally, the use of dose intensification has not been studied in non-anthracycline, taxane-based regimens, which are being increasingly evaluated and used in women with node-negative, ER-positive disease.
With these caveats in mind, the results of this meta-analysis are undoubtedly clinically important. In modern practice, if anthracycline-based chemotherapy is warranted, these data provide convincing evidence that a dose-intense approach should be considered.
Sara A Hurvitz, MD, is from the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Santa Monica, Calif. Her remarks are excerpted from an editorial accompanying the study. She reports institutional research funding and fees for abstract and manuscript writing from several pharmaceutical companies outside of the submitted work, and travel reimbursement from Lilly outside of the submitted work.
Although these results are meaningful, several limitations should be recognized as we translate these findings into practice. First, the benefits of dose intensification have not been established in the era of targeted therapy. Given that these studies enrolled women from 1985 to 2011, HER2 status was known for only 50% of tumors. Of those tested, 16% (n = 2,994) were HER2 positive. Use of trastuzumab was not reported but was probably uncommon since adjuvant trastuzumab was not approved until 2006. The remaining 18,625 patients did not have HER2 testing; thus, no HER2-directed therapy would have been given. Therefore, the majority of patients with HER2- positive breast cancer did not receive targeted therapy.
Although the authors report that women with HER2-positive and HER2-negative disease benefit similarly from dose intensification, it is impossible to know whether dose intensification benefits trastuzumab-treated patients or those who receive more than one HER2-targeted therapy (pertuzumab, neratinib, or trastuzumab-emtansine). Similarly, if other targeted therapies such as CDK4/6 inhibitors and PARP inhibitors show significant benefit in the curative setting for high-risk estrogen receptor (ER)-positive or BRCA-mutated breast cancer, prospective studies will be required to establish whether dose-intensive chemotherapy is better than standard chemotherapy in those settings.
Second, it is premature to conclude that patients older than 70 years or those with node-negative disease benefit from dose intensification, given the small number of patients in those groups and the fact that no significant benefit was observed for these patients. Moreover, gene-expression profiling was not used in these studies; thus, the benefit, if any, of a dose-intense approach for women with lymph-node-negative, high-risk, ER-positive disease is impossible to know. Finally, the use of dose intensification has not been studied in non-anthracycline, taxane-based regimens, which are being increasingly evaluated and used in women with node-negative, ER-positive disease.
With these caveats in mind, the results of this meta-analysis are undoubtedly clinically important. In modern practice, if anthracycline-based chemotherapy is warranted, these data provide convincing evidence that a dose-intense approach should be considered.
Sara A Hurvitz, MD, is from the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Santa Monica, Calif. Her remarks are excerpted from an editorial accompanying the study. She reports institutional research funding and fees for abstract and manuscript writing from several pharmaceutical companies outside of the submitted work, and travel reimbursement from Lilly outside of the submitted work.
Although these results are meaningful, several limitations should be recognized as we translate these findings into practice. First, the benefits of dose intensification have not been established in the era of targeted therapy. Given that these studies enrolled women from 1985 to 2011, HER2 status was known for only 50% of tumors. Of those tested, 16% (n = 2,994) were HER2 positive. Use of trastuzumab was not reported but was probably uncommon since adjuvant trastuzumab was not approved until 2006. The remaining 18,625 patients did not have HER2 testing; thus, no HER2-directed therapy would have been given. Therefore, the majority of patients with HER2- positive breast cancer did not receive targeted therapy.
Although the authors report that women with HER2-positive and HER2-negative disease benefit similarly from dose intensification, it is impossible to know whether dose intensification benefits trastuzumab-treated patients or those who receive more than one HER2-targeted therapy (pertuzumab, neratinib, or trastuzumab-emtansine). Similarly, if other targeted therapies such as CDK4/6 inhibitors and PARP inhibitors show significant benefit in the curative setting for high-risk estrogen receptor (ER)-positive or BRCA-mutated breast cancer, prospective studies will be required to establish whether dose-intensive chemotherapy is better than standard chemotherapy in those settings.
Second, it is premature to conclude that patients older than 70 years or those with node-negative disease benefit from dose intensification, given the small number of patients in those groups and the fact that no significant benefit was observed for these patients. Moreover, gene-expression profiling was not used in these studies; thus, the benefit, if any, of a dose-intense approach for women with lymph-node-negative, high-risk, ER-positive disease is impossible to know. Finally, the use of dose intensification has not been studied in non-anthracycline, taxane-based regimens, which are being increasingly evaluated and used in women with node-negative, ER-positive disease.
With these caveats in mind, the results of this meta-analysis are undoubtedly clinically important. In modern practice, if anthracycline-based chemotherapy is warranted, these data provide convincing evidence that a dose-intense approach should be considered.
Sara A Hurvitz, MD, is from the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Santa Monica, Calif. Her remarks are excerpted from an editorial accompanying the study. She reports institutional research funding and fees for abstract and manuscript writing from several pharmaceutical companies outside of the submitted work, and travel reimbursement from Lilly outside of the submitted work.
Dose-intense adjuvant chemotherapy is associated with significant if modest improvements in recurrence-free, breast cancer–specific, and overall survival among women with early breast cancer, results of a meta-analysis of data on individual patients showed.
Among more than 37,000 patients treated in 26 clinical trials with a median follow-up of 7.4 years, there was a 14% reduction in relative risk and 3.4% reduction in absolute 10-year risk of breast cancer recurrence for women who were treated either with accelerated-schedule or sequential chemotherapy, reported members of the Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (EBCTCG).
There were no differences in deaths from cardiovascular disease, acute myeloid leukemia, or other cancers between patients treated with dose-intense regimens or schedules and those treated with standard chemotherapy, although patients on dose-intense regimens had higher incidence of grade 3 or 4 anemia, and more did not complete the prescribed courses compared with standard chemotherapy, the investigators noted.
“The balance of benefit versus toxicity, therefore, appears to favor more dose-intense chemotherapy. A further advantage of 2-weekly versus 3-weekly chemotherapy – but not of sequential versus concurrent chemotherapy – is treatment is completed sooner,” they wrote in The Lancet.
The investigators examined individual patient data for 26 of 33 trials comparing either 2-weekly chemotherapy with 3-weekly therapy, or sequential vs. concurrent anthracycline and taxane-based chemotherapy.
The trials comprised a total cohort of 37,297 women randomized, most of whom were younger than 70 years at the time of diagnose and had node-positive disease.
The 10 year-risk for breast cancer recurrence, one of two primary endpoints, was 28% with dose intensification vs. 31.4% with standard dosing, translating into a first-event rate ratio (RR) for recurrence of 0.86 (P less than .0001).
Ten-year breast-cancer mortality, the other primary endpoint, was 18.9% among patients treated with dose-intensified regimens or schedules, compared with 21.3% for patients treated under standard protocols.
All-cause mortality was lower with dose intensification (22.1% vs. 24.8%, P less than .0001), and death without recurrence was also slightly but significantly lower (4.1% vs. 4.6%, respectively, P = .034).
The reductions in recurrence rates were similar among trials comparing 2-week vs. 3-week chemotherapy cycles, sequential vs. concurrent schedules, and both strategies together.
“The proportional reductions in recurrence with dose-intense chemotherapy were similar and highly significant [P less than .0001) in estrogen receptor (ER)-positive and ER-negative disease and did not differ significantly by other patient or tumor characteristics,” the investigators wrote.
“The present findings are of limited relevance to the question of which women with early breast cancer should be offered chemotherapy, although they do indicate that chemotherapy can reduce breast cancer mortality rates by 40% rather than a third. The absolute gain from this proportional reduction in recurrence depends chiefly on what the risk of distant recurrence would be without chemotherapy, which varies greatly from one woman to another, and is the subject of much ongoing research,” the investigators wrote.
“The findings are, however, directly relevant to selection of what regimen to use, and they show that, if chemotherapy is to be given, a dose-intense regimen should at least be considered,” they wrote.
The meta-analysis was funded by Cancer Research UK and the Medical Research Council. All authors reported having no relevant disclosures.
SOURCE: EBCTCG. The Lancet. 2019 Feb 7. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)33137-4.
Dose-intense adjuvant chemotherapy is associated with significant if modest improvements in recurrence-free, breast cancer–specific, and overall survival among women with early breast cancer, results of a meta-analysis of data on individual patients showed.
Among more than 37,000 patients treated in 26 clinical trials with a median follow-up of 7.4 years, there was a 14% reduction in relative risk and 3.4% reduction in absolute 10-year risk of breast cancer recurrence for women who were treated either with accelerated-schedule or sequential chemotherapy, reported members of the Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (EBCTCG).
There were no differences in deaths from cardiovascular disease, acute myeloid leukemia, or other cancers between patients treated with dose-intense regimens or schedules and those treated with standard chemotherapy, although patients on dose-intense regimens had higher incidence of grade 3 or 4 anemia, and more did not complete the prescribed courses compared with standard chemotherapy, the investigators noted.
“The balance of benefit versus toxicity, therefore, appears to favor more dose-intense chemotherapy. A further advantage of 2-weekly versus 3-weekly chemotherapy – but not of sequential versus concurrent chemotherapy – is treatment is completed sooner,” they wrote in The Lancet.
The investigators examined individual patient data for 26 of 33 trials comparing either 2-weekly chemotherapy with 3-weekly therapy, or sequential vs. concurrent anthracycline and taxane-based chemotherapy.
The trials comprised a total cohort of 37,297 women randomized, most of whom were younger than 70 years at the time of diagnose and had node-positive disease.
The 10 year-risk for breast cancer recurrence, one of two primary endpoints, was 28% with dose intensification vs. 31.4% with standard dosing, translating into a first-event rate ratio (RR) for recurrence of 0.86 (P less than .0001).
Ten-year breast-cancer mortality, the other primary endpoint, was 18.9% among patients treated with dose-intensified regimens or schedules, compared with 21.3% for patients treated under standard protocols.
All-cause mortality was lower with dose intensification (22.1% vs. 24.8%, P less than .0001), and death without recurrence was also slightly but significantly lower (4.1% vs. 4.6%, respectively, P = .034).
The reductions in recurrence rates were similar among trials comparing 2-week vs. 3-week chemotherapy cycles, sequential vs. concurrent schedules, and both strategies together.
“The proportional reductions in recurrence with dose-intense chemotherapy were similar and highly significant [P less than .0001) in estrogen receptor (ER)-positive and ER-negative disease and did not differ significantly by other patient or tumor characteristics,” the investigators wrote.
“The present findings are of limited relevance to the question of which women with early breast cancer should be offered chemotherapy, although they do indicate that chemotherapy can reduce breast cancer mortality rates by 40% rather than a third. The absolute gain from this proportional reduction in recurrence depends chiefly on what the risk of distant recurrence would be without chemotherapy, which varies greatly from one woman to another, and is the subject of much ongoing research,” the investigators wrote.
“The findings are, however, directly relevant to selection of what regimen to use, and they show that, if chemotherapy is to be given, a dose-intense regimen should at least be considered,” they wrote.
The meta-analysis was funded by Cancer Research UK and the Medical Research Council. All authors reported having no relevant disclosures.
SOURCE: EBCTCG. The Lancet. 2019 Feb 7. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)33137-4.
FROM THE LANCET
Key clinical point: Consider dose-intensification or sequential therapy for patients undergoing chemotherapy.
Major finding: Ten-year recurrence rates were 28% with dose intensification vs. 31.4% for standard dosing.
Study details: Meta-analysis of individual data on 37,298 women enrolled in 26 randomized trials.
Disclosures: The meta-analysis was funded by Cancer Research UK and the Medical Research Council. All authors reported having no relevant disclosures.
Source: EBCTCG. The Lancet. 2019 Feb 7. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)33137-4.