Phase II randomized trial of a non-steroidal mouth wash for prevention and treatment of stomatitis in women with hormone receptor positive breast cancer treated with everolimus.

BACKGROUND: Stomatitis is a frequent dose limiting toxicity of everolimus, an approved therapy for patients with metastatic breast cancer. No randomized trials of a prophylactic measure to prevent mucositis have been reported. METHODS: We conducted a phase II, open-label trial in which patients with metastatic breast cancer starting everolimus were randomized to best supportive care (BSC) versus prophylactic use of an oral mucoadhesive, non-steroid containing mouth wash. The primary endpoint was rate of any grade stomatitis as reported by the treating physicians. Secondary endpoints were severity of stomatitis according to the Oral Mucositis Assessment Scale (OMAS) and rates of everolimus dose reduction or discontinuation due to mucositis. RESULTS: Of 61 evaluable patients, 32 were randomized to and treated with oral mucoadhesive and 29 with BSC. Any grade stomatitis developed in 46.9% (15/32) of study arm and 65.5% (19/29) of BSC arm patients (p = 0.14). The difference between the two arms was significantly in favor of the mucoadhesive arm when mucositis was scored according to the OMAS with average score of 0.3 in study arm versus 0.5 in the control arm (p = 0.03). There were fewer dose adjustments or therapy discontinuations in the study arm compared with BSC (16% versus 31%, respectively) but the difference did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSION: Here we provide early evidence from the first randomized trial supporting the use of oral prophylactic mucoadhesive for everolimus-associated stomatitis. A trial comparing prophylactic oral mucoadhesive to steroid mouth wash may be warranted.

Spontaneous hematoma of the thigh associated with antiproteinase-3 antibody in a patient with metastatic squamous cell carcinoma treated with nivolumab.

We report an unusual case of spontaneous intramuscular hematoma associated with antiproteinase 3 antibody in a patient with metastatic squamous cell carcinoma receiving nivolumab and the medical literature is reviewed.

Randomized phase II study of fulvestrant and erlotinib compared with erlotinib alone in patients with advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer.

OBJECTIVES: This open-label, randomized phase II trial evaluated antitumor efficacy of an antiestrogen, fulvestrant, in combination with human epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitor, erlotinib, in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced or metastatic NSCLC, ECOG 0-2, previous chemotherapy unless patient refusal, and no prior EGFR-directed therapy were randomized 2:1 to erlotinib 150 mg oral daily plus 500 mg intramuscular fulvestrant on day 1, 15, 29 and every 28 days thereafter or erlotinib alone 150 mg oral daily. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR); secondary endpoints included progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Among 106 randomized patients, 100 received at least one dose of study drug. ORR was 16.4% (11 of 67 patients) for the combination versus 12.1% (4 of 33 patients) for erlotinib (p = 0.77). PFS median 3.5 versus 1.9 months [HR = 0.86, 95% CI (0.52-1.43), p = 0.29] and OS median 9.5 versus 5.8 months [HR = 0.92, 95% CI (0.57-1.48), p = 0.74] numerically favored the combination. In an unplanned subset analysis, among EGFR wild type patients (n = 51), but not EGFR mutant patients (n = 17), median PFS was 3.5 versus 1.7 months [HR = 0.35, 95% CI (0.14-0.86), p = 0.02] and OS was 6.2 versus 5.2 months [HR = 0.72, 95% CI (0.35-1.48), p = 0.37] for combined therapy versus erlotinib, respectively. Notably, EGFR WT patients were more likely to be hormone receptor-positive (either estrogen receptor α- and/or progesterone receptor-positive) compared to EGFR mutant patients (50% versus 9.1%, respectively) (p = 0.03). Treatment was well tolerated with predominant grade 1-2 dermatologic and gastrointestinal adverse effects. CONCLUSION: Addition of fulvestrant to erlotinib was well tolerated, with increased activity noted among EGFR wild type patients compared to erlotinib alone, albeit in an unplanned subset analysis.

A phase II trial of docetaxel with bevacizumab as first-line therapy for HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer (TORI B01).

INTRODUCTION: Addition of the antiangiogenic agent bevacizumab to paclitaxel significantly improves response rates and progression-free survival for metastatic breast cancer (MBC). To assess the activity of docetaxel plus bevacizumab, a multicenter phase II trial was conducted. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with measurable first-line HER2/neu-negative MBC were eligible. This trial began as a 2-arm study with a docetaxel-alone arm. When bevacizumab became widely available, it was converted to a 1-arm open-label trial of docetaxel/bevacizumab. Patients enrolled in the docetaxel-alone arm were permitted to cross over to docetaxel/bevacizumab. Patients received bevacizumab 15 mg/kg and docetaxel 75 mg/m2 intravenously (I.V.) every 3 weeks until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or consent withdrawal. RESULTS: From March 2005 to September 2006, 76 patients were enrolled. Of the 7 patients who were randomized to docetaxel alone, 6 crossed over to docetaxel/bevacizumab (included in the safety analysis only). Two patients were found to be ineligible before receiving drug. Efficacy data are based on the 67 patients who were originally enrolled in the docetaxel/bevacizumab arm and received at least 1 dose of study medication. The confirmed objective response rate is 51% (34 of 67) with 9% complete responses (6 of 67) and 42% partial responses (28 of 67). Nine additional patients (13%) had stable disease lasting >or= 6 months. With a median follow-up of 21.7 months, the median time to progression is 9.3 months, and median overall survival is 26.3 months. Common grade 3/4 adverse events included neutropenia (33%), leukopenia/lymphopenia (25%), fatigue (22%), infection (17%), pain (16%), and hypertension (9%). CONCLUSION: Docetaxel/bevacizumab was generally well tolerated with manageable toxicity and promising efficacy results.