Results of a Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Phase 1b/2 Trial of Nabpaclitaxel + Gemcitabine ± Olaratumab in Treatment-Naïve Participants with Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer.

The efficacy and safety of olaratumab plus nabpaclitaxel and gemcitabine in treatment-naïve participants with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma was evaluated. An initial phase 1b dose-escalation trial was conducted to determine the olaratumab dose for the phase 2 trial, a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to compare overall survival (OS) in the olaratumab arm vs. placebo arms. In phase 1b, 22 participants received olaratumab at doses of 15 and 20 mg/kg with a fixed dose of nabpaclitaxel and gemcitabine. In phase 2, 159 participants were randomized to receive olaratumab 20 mg/kg in cycle 1 followed by 15 mg/kg in the subsequent cycles (n = 81) or the placebo (n = 78) on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle, plus nabpaclitaxel and gemcitabine. The primary objective of the trial was not met, with a median OS of 9.1 vs. 10.8 months (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.05; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.728, 1.527; p = 0.79) and the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.5 vs. 6.4 months (HR = 1.19; 95% CI: 0.806, 1.764; p = 0.38), in the olaratumab vs. placebo arms, respectively. The most common treatment-emergent adverse event of any grade across both arms was fatigue. Olaratumab plus chemotherapy failed to improve the OS or PFS in participants with metastatic PDAC. There were no new safety signals.

Randomized Phase 2 Clinical Trial of Olaratumab in Combination with Gemcitabine and Docetaxel in Advanced Soft Tissue Sarcomas.

Gemcitabine plus docetaxel is an effective treatment regimen for advanced soft tissue sarcomas (STSs). However, the prognosis for patients remains poor, and thus there is an urgent medical need for novel and effective therapies to improve long-term outcomes. The aim of the ANNOUNCE 2 trial was to explore the addition of olaratumab (O) to gemcitabine (G) and docetaxel (D) for advanced STS. Adults with unresectable locally advanced/metastatic STS, ≤2 prior lines of systemic therapy, and ECOG PS 0-1 were eligible. In Phase 2, patients were randomized 1:1 from two cohorts (O-naïve and O-pretreated) to 21-day cycles of olaratumab (20 mg/kg Cycle 1 and 15 mg/kg other cycles, Days 1 and 8), gemcitabine (900 mg/m2, Days 1 and 8), and docetaxel (75 mg/m2, Day 8). The primary objective was overall survival (OS) in the O-naïve population (α level = 0.20). Secondary endpoints included OS (O-pretreated), other efficacy parameters, patient-reported outcomes, safety, pharmacokinetics, and immunogenicity. A total of 167 and 89 patients were enrolled in the O-naïve and O-pretreated cohorts, respectively. Baseline patient characteristics were well balanced. No statistically significant difference in OS was observed between the investigational vs. control arm for either cohort (O-naïve cohort: HR = 0.95 (95% CI: 0.64-1.40), p = 0.78, median OS, 16.8 vs. 18.0 months; O-pretreated cohort: HR = 0.67 (95% CI: 0.39-1.16), p = 0.15, median OS 19.8 vs. 17.3 months). Safety was manageable across treatment arms. There was no statistically significant difference in the primary endpoint of OS between the two arms in the O-naïve population, and therefore based on hierarchical evaluation no other outcomes in this study can be considered statistically significant. No new safety signals were observed.

Exploratory Analysis of Patients With Gastric/Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma With or Without Liver Metastasis From the Phase 3 RAINBOW Study.

PURPOSE: Liver metastasis (LM) is reported in approximately 40% of patients with advanced/metastatic gastric/gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (metastatic esophagogastric adenocarcinoma; mGEA) and is associated with a worse prognosis. This post-hoc analysis from the RAINBOW trial reported the efficacy, safety, and biomarker outcomes of ramucirumab and paclitaxel combination treatment (RAM+PAC) in patients with (LM+) and without (LM-) LM at baseline. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients (n=665) were randomly assigned on a 1:1 basis to receive either RAM+PAC (LM+: 150, LM-: 180) or placebo and paclitaxel (PL+PAC) (LM+: 138, LM-: 197). The overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were evaluated using stratified Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression models. The correlation of dichotomized biomarkers (VEGF-C, D; VEGFR-1,2) with efficacy in the LM+ versus LM- subgroups was analyzed using the Cox regression model with reported interaction P-values. RESULTS: The presence of LM was associated with earlier progression than those without LM, particularly in patients receiving PL+PAC (hazard ratio [HR], 1.68). RAM+PAC treatment improved OS and PFS irrespective of LM status but showed greater improvement in LM+ than that in LM- (OS HR, 0.71 [LM+] vs. 0.88 [LM-]; PFS HR, 0.47 [LM+] vs. 0.76 [LM-]). Treatment-emergent adverse events were similar between patients with and without LM. No predictive relationship was observed between biomarker levels (VEGF-C, D; VEGFR-1,2) and efficacy outcome (OS, PFS) (all interaction P-values >0.05). CONCLUSIONS: RAM provided a significant benefit, irrespective of LM status; however, its effect was numerically stronger in patients with LM. Therefore, RAM+PAC is a clinically meaningful therapeutic option for patients with mGEA and LM. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01170663.

TP53 Co-Mutation Status Association with Clinical Outcomes in Patients with EGFR-Mutant Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

TP53 co-mutations have shown association with poor prognosis in various solid tumors. For EGFR-mutated advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC), conflicting results exist regarding its impact on survival. Clinical outcomes and genomic data were obtained retrospectively from the real-world (rw) de-identified clinicogenomic database. Patients who initiated therapy for EGFR-mutated aNSCLC between January 2014 and December 2020 were identified. Clinical outcomes were evaluated by TP53-mutational status. In 356 eligible EGFR-mutated aNSCLC patients (median age 68 years), 210 (59.0%) had TP53 co-mutation and 146 (41.0%) had TP53 wild-type tumor. Unadjusted analysis showed significantly shorter survival in patients with TP53 co-mutation versus TP53 wild-type (rw progression-free survival [rwPFS]: HR = 1.4, 95% CI 1.1-1.9, p = 0.0196; overall survival [OS]: HR = 1.6, 95% CI 1.1-2.2, p = 0.0088). Multivariable analysis confirmed independent association between TP53 co-mutation and worse rwPFS (HR = 1.4, 95% CI 1.0-0.9, p = 0.0280) and OS (HR = 1.4, 95% CI 1.0-2.0, p = 0.0345). Directionally consistent findings were observed for response rates, and subgroups by EGFR-activating mutation and first-line (1 L) therapy, with more pronounced negative effect in 1 L EGFR-TKI subgroup. TP53 co-mutations negatively affected survival in patients with EGFR-mutated aNSCLC receiving standard 1 L therapy in real-world practice.

Health and resource burden of a cancer diagnosis on the caregiver: an analysis of administrative claims data.

PURPOSE: Cancer diagnosis is known to affect the family; however, administrative claims data are not commonly used to evaluate the broader impact of cancer diagnosis. This study was designed to evaluate the feasibility of using claims data to explore the impact of cancer diagnosis on the caregiver. METHODS: IBM Marketscan data were used to identify eligible cancer patients, who were required to have a second adult over the age of 18 (defined as "caregiver" for this study) covered by the same the healthcare policy. Eligible control pairs included any two adults in the same policy with no evidence of cancer; for each pair one adult was randomly assigned to be the "patient control" while their partner was assigned as "caregiver control". Probabilistic stratified sampling was used select control pairs for analysis by matching the relative frequencies within sex and age group strata to those of patient/caregiver pairs. Eligible control pairs were probabilistically sampled without replacement until the stratum with at least 0.5 % relative frequency had been completely sampled. Caregiver and caregiver control healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), new diagnoses, and healthcare costs were compared during the 12-month post-diagnosis period. Subgroup analyses were conducted by cancer subtypes (breast, colorectal, lung, gastric, sarcoma) and by sex of the patient and caregiver. RESULTS: A total of 62,893 patient/caregiver pairs and 449,177 control pairs were included. Overall, caregivers used slightly fewer healthcare resources and expended less costs during the 12-month period after the cancer diagnosis than controls (physician visits; 85.8 % vs. 95.7 %; hospitalizations 5.4 % vs. 7.0 %; emergency room visits 15.7 % versus 16.2 %, all p ≤ 0.001). This finding was consistent in all subgroup analyses. New diagnoses were lower in the caregiver cohort, except for mental disorders, which were higher than controls (14.3 % vs. 9.9 %, p < 0.0001). Psychotherapeutic/antidepressant utilization occurred among 21.0 % of caregivers versus 17.2 % of caregiver controls during this period. CONCLUSIONS: It is feasible to use administrative claims data to evaluate the impact of a cancer diagnosis on the caregiver to evaluate outcomes such as HCRU, diagnoses and costs. These findings raise hypotheses about deferment of health care and increased mental distress during the caregiving period.

Real-world characteristics and outcomes of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients with EGFR exon 19 deletions or exon 21 mutations.

Aim: To estimate real-world (rw) outcomes for first-line therapy in patients with advanced EGF receptor (EGFR)-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), focusing on specific mutation types. Patients & methods: Retrospective observational study (n = 244 patients). Results: Univariate/multivariate analyses showed longer rw progression-free survival (rwPFS) and rwPFS2 in patients with ex19del versus Leu858Arg mutations. Median overall survival was 12.3 months longer with ex19del versus Leu858Arg mutations (HR: 1.47 [95% CI: 0.96-2.25]; p = 0.074). With EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitor monotherapy, unadjusted rwPFS for ex19del mutations was longer than for Leu858Arg mutations (HR: 1.62 [95% CI: 1.03-2.56]; p = 0.036). Conclusion: In this rw cohort of patients with advanced EGFR+ NSCLC, ex19del mutations conferred a prognostic advantage over Leu858Arg mutations, with significantly better rwPFS and rwPFS2.

Prospective Evaluation of Doxorubicin Cardiotoxicity in Patients with Advanced Soft-tissue Sarcoma Treated in the ANNOUNCE Phase III Randomized Trial.

PURPOSE: Few prospective studies have assessed anthracycline-associated cardiotoxicity in patients with sarcoma. We evaluated cardiotoxicity in patients with soft-tissue sarcomas administered doxorubicin in the phase III ANNOUNCE trial (NCT02451943). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were anthracycline-naïve adults with locally advanced or metastatic disease and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≥50%. Patients could receive eight cycles of doxorubicin at 75 mg/m2. The cardioprotectant, dexrazoxane, was allowed at investigator discretion. Symptomatic cardiac adverse events (AEs) were recorded using Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities and graded using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events 4.0. LVEF deterioration was measured by echocardiogram or multigated acquisition scan, defined as a decrease to <50%, or decrease from baseline value >10%. RESULTS: A total of 504 patients received ≥1 cycles of doxorubicin [median cumulative dose, 450.3 mg/m2 (range, 72.3-634.0)]. Median follow-up of cardiac AEs was 28 weeks. Dexrazoxane was coadministered more frequently to patients receiving higher cumulative doxorubicin doses (38.6% receiving <450 mg/m2, 88.5% receiving 450-<600 mg/m2, and 90% receiving ≥600 mg/m2) and did not affect treatment efficacy. LVEF deterioration was seen in 62 of 153 (40.5%) patients who received a cumulative dose <450 mg/m2, 82 of 159 patients (51.6%) who received 450-<600 mg/m2, and 50 of 89 patients (56.2%) who received ≥600 mg/m2. Grade ≥3 cardiac dysfunction occurred in 2% of patients at <450 mg/m2, 3% at 450-<600 mg/m2, and 1.1% at ≥600 mg/m2. Incidence of treatment-related cardiac AEs was low across all dose ranges. CONCLUSIONS: Although follow-up was short, these results suggest doxorubicin can be administered at high cumulative doses (>450 mg/m2), with a low rate of cardiotoxicities, in the context of dexrazoxane coadministration.See related commentary by Benjamin and Minotti, p. 3809.

Exposure-response relationship of olaratumab for survival outcomes and safety when combined with doxorubicin in patients with soft tissue sarcoma.

PURPOSE: Olaratumab is a recombinant human IgG1 monoclonal antibody against PGDFRα. Olaratumab plus doxorubicin improved survivalversus doxorubicin in an open-label, randomised phase 2 soft tissue sarcoma (STS) trial. We characterised the olaratumab exposure-response relationship for progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. METHODS: PFS and OS data from the 133 patients enrolled in the phase 2 study were analysed using time-to-event modelling. The effect of olaratumab on PFS/OS was explored using the trough serum concentration after cycle 1 (Cmin1) and the average concentration throughout treatment (Cavg). The rate of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) was compared across olaratumab exposure quartiles. RESULTS: PFS and OS were described by models with an exponential hazard function and inhibitory EMAX functions to describe the effect of olaratumab, regardless of the PK endpoint. The olaratumab EC50s for PFS (ECmin150 = 82.0 µg/mL, ECavg50 = 179 µg/mL) and OS (ECmin150 = 66.1 µg/mL, ECavg50 = 134 µg/mL) corresponded to the median and 25th percentile of Cmin1/Cavg in the study, respectively. Maximum predicted improvement in the hazard ratio for OS and PFS was approximately 75% and 60%, respectively. There was no change in the rate of TEAEs with increasing olaratumab serum levels. CONCLUSIONS: PFS/OS benefits occurred without a rate change in TEAEs across quartiles. Maximum benefit in OS was achieved in the upper three quartiles and a potential of early disease progression in the lower quartile of olaratumab serum exposure. These results prompted a loading dose strategy in the ongoing phase 3 STS trial.

Phase III study of gemcitabine and cisplatin with or without aprinocarsen, a protein kinase C-alpha antisense oligonucleotide, in patients with advanced-stage non-small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: To determine whether aprinocarsen, an antisense oligonucleotide directed against protein kinase C-alpha, when added to the chemotherapy regimen of gemcitabine and cisplatin improved survival in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with previously untreated stage IIIB/IV NSCLC and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, were randomly assigned to either a control arm of gemcitabine 1,250 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 and cisplatin 80 mg/m2 on day 1, or experimental arms consisting of the identical chemotherapy plus aprinocarsen 2 mg/kg/d as continuous infusion for 14 days, starting on either day 1 or 3 days before chemotherapy. Cycles were repeated every 21 days. RESULTS: A total of 670 patients were randomly assigned between the control (n = 328) and experimental arms (n = 342). Due to the results from another phase III study of aprinocarsen in NSCLC, further enrollment was stopped, and the study was terminated early. The median number of cycles was four on the control arm and three on the combined experimental arms. Median overall survival was not different between the two groups (control, 10.4 months [95% CI, 8.6 to 12.2]; experimental, 10.0 months [95% CI, 8.4 to 10.8]; P = .613; hazard ratio = 1.05 [95% CI, 0.88 to 1.25]). Response rates (control arm, 35.0%; experimental arms, 28.9%; P = .124) and other time-to-event measures were not significantly different. Grade 3 and 4 toxicities were significantly increased for thrombocytopenia (P < .0001), epistaxis, and thrombosis/embolism in the experimental arms. CONCLUSION: Adding aprinocarsen to gemcitabine and cisplatin regimen did not enhance survival and other efficacy measures in patients with advanced NSCLC.

Pemetrexed combined with oxaliplatin or carboplatin as first-line treatment in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a multicenter, randomized, phase II trial.

PURPOSE: To determine efficacy and toxicity of two pemetrexed-based regimens in chemonaive patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Patients were randomly assigned to receive pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2) plus oxaliplatin 120 mg/m(2) (PemOx) or pemetrexed plus carboplatin AUC6 (PemCb). All drugs were given on day 1 of a 21-day cycle for up to six cycles. Folic acid and vitamin B(12) were given to all patients to minimize pemetrexed-related toxicities. RESULTS: Forty-one patients received PemOx and 39 received PemCb. Objective tumor response rates were 26.8% for PemOx patients (95% confidence interval, 14.2-42.9) and 31.6% for PemCb patients (95% confidence interval, 17.5-48.7). Median time to progression was 5.5 and 5.7 months, respectively, for PemOx and PemCb. Median overall survival times were 10.5 months for both treatment groups (range, <1 to >20 months). The 1-year survival rate was 49.9% for PemOx patients and 43.9% for PemCb patients. Common toxicity criteria grade 3 or 4 hematologic toxicities among PemOx patients were grade 3 or 4 neutropenia (7.3%), grade 3 thrombocytopenia (2.4%), and grade 3 anemia (2.4%). PemCb patients experienced grade 3 or 4 neutropenia (25.6%), grade 3 or 4 thrombocytopenia (17.9%), and grade 3 anemia (7.7%). Grade 3 vomiting occurred in three PemOx patients and grade 3 fatigue occurred in three PemCb patients. One grade 3 neurosensory toxicity occurred in the PemOx group. Three patients (PemOx 1 and PemCb 2) experienced febrile neutropenia. CONCLUSIONS: Efficacy measures for both regimens seem similar to the most effective chemotherapies for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (platinum combinations) with less hematologic and nonhematologic toxicity. Comparing either of these two regimens to platinum-based therapies in a large randomized trial is warranted.

Robustness of an Adaptive Beamforming Method for Hearing Aids.

We describe the results of computer simulations of a multimicrophone adaptive-beamforming system as a noise reduction device for hearing aids. Of particular concern was the system's sensitivity to violations of the underlying assumption that the target signal is identical at the microphones. Two-and four-microphone versions of the system were tested in simulated anechoic and modestly-reverberant environments with one and two jammers, and with deviations from the assumed straight-ahead target direction. Also examined were the effects of input target-to-jammer ratio and adaptive-filter length. Generally, although the noise-reduction performance of the system is degraded by target misalignment and modest reverberation, the system still provides positive advantage at input target-to-jammer ratios up to about 0 dB. This is in contrast to the degrading target-cancellation effect that the system can have when the equal-target assumption is violated and the input target-to-jammer ratio is greater than zero.