Safety and activity of alisertib, an investigational aurora kinase A inhibitor, in patients with breast cancer, small-cell lung cancer, non-small-cell lung cancer, head and neck squamous-cell carcinoma, and gastro-oesophageal adenocarcinoma: a five-arm phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: Alisertib is an investigational, oral, selective inhibitor of aurora kinase A. We aimed to investigate the safety and activity of single-agent alisertib in patients with predefined types of advanced solid tumours. METHODS: We did a multicentre phase 1/2 study at 40 centres in four countries (Czech Republic, France, Poland, and the USA). Here, we report results from phase 2; enrolment for the study began on Feb 16, 2010, and ended on May 3, 2013. Adult patients were eligible for the study if they had either breast cancer, small-cell lung cancer, non-small-cell lung cancer, head and neck squamous-cell carcinoma, or gastro-oesophageal adenocarcinoma that had relapsed or was refractory to chemotherapy. Patients had to have undergone two or fewer previous cytotoxic regimens (four or fewer for breast cancer patients), not including adjuvant or neoadjuvant treatments. Enrolment followed a two-stage design: to proceed to the second stage, two or more objective responses were needed in the first 20 response-assessable patients in each of the five tumour cohorts. Alisertib was administered orally in 21-day cycles at the recommended phase 2 dose of 50 mg twice daily for 7 days followed by a break of 14 days. The protocol-specified primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with an objective response, assessed by Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors version 1.1 in the response-assessable population (ie, patients with measurable disease who received at least one dose of alisertib and had undergone at least one post-baseline tumour assessment). This completed trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01045421. FINDINGS: By May 31, 2013, 249 patients had been treated, 53 with breast cancer, 60 with small-cell lung cancer, 26 with non-small-cell lung cancer, 55 with head and neck squamous-cell carcinoma, and 55 with gastro-oesophageal adenocarcinoma. Among response-assessable patients, an objective response was noted in nine (18%, 95% CI 9-32) of 49 women with breast cancer, ten (21%, 10-35) of 48 participants with small-cell lung cancer, one (4%, 0-22) of 23 patients with non-small-cell lung cancer, four (9%, 2-21) of 45 people with head and neck squamous-cell carcinoma, and four (9%, 2-20) of 47 individuals with gastro-oesophageal adenocarcinoma; all were partial responses. Adverse events were similar across tumour types. The most frequent drug-related grade 3-4 adverse events included neutropenia (n=107 [43%]), leukopenia (53 [21%]), and anaemia (26 [10%]). Serious drug-related adverse events were reported in 108 (43%) patients. INTERPRETATION: These data support further clinical assessment of alisertib in patients with solid tumours, particularly those with breast cancer and small-cell lung cancer. FUNDING: Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc, a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited.

Randomized phase II study of carboplatin and etoposide with or without obatoclax mesylate in extensive-stage small cell lung cancer.

OBJECTIVE: This randomized phase II study assessed the efficacy and safety of obatoclax mesylate, a small-molecule Bcl-2 inhibitor, added to carboplatin/etoposide chemotherapy as initial treatment for extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Chemotherapy-naïve subjects with ES-SCLC and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) 0-2 received carboplatin/etoposide with (CbEOb) or without (CbE) obatoclax for up to six cycles. Responders to CbEOb could receive maintenance obatoclax until disease progression. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). RESULTS: 155 subjects (median age 62, 58% male, 10% ECOG PS 2) were treated with CbEOb (n=77) or CbE (n=78); 65% and 59% of subjects, respectively, completed six cycles. ORR was 62% with CbEOb versus 53% with CbE (1-sided p=0.143). Clinical benefit (ORR+ stable disease) trended better with CbEOb (81% versus 68%; p=0.054). Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 5.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.3-6.5) and 10.5 months (8.9-13.8) with CbEOb and 5.2 months (95% CI: 4.1-5.7) and 9.8 months (7.2-11.2) with CbE. Median OS was 10.5 months (95% CI: 8.9-13.8) and 9.8 months (7.2-11.2) with a nonsignificant hazard ratio for OS, 0.823; 1-sided p=0.121. Grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs) were primarily hematologic and similar in frequency between treatment arms. Obatoclax-related somnolence and euphoria were grade 1/2, transient, and did not require treatment discontinuation. CONCLUSION: Obatoclax was well tolerated when added to carboplatin/etoposide in first-line treatment of ES-SCLC, but failed to significantly improve ORR, PFS, or OS.

Randomized phase 2b study of pralatrexate versus erlotinib in patients with stage IIIB/IV non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after failure of prior platinum-based therapy.

INTRODUCTION: Pralatrexate, a folate analogue targeting dihydrofolate reductase, has antitumor activity in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This randomized phase 2b trial was designed to further evaluate pralatrexate activity in NSCLC by estimating overall survival (OS) relative to erlotinib in patients with relapsed/refractory disease. METHODS: In 43 centers across 6 countries, patients were randomized 1:1 to receive intravenous pralatrexate 190 mg/m on days 1 and 15 of a 28-day cycle, or oral erlotinib 150 mg/day. The primary objective was to estimate OS in all patients and prespecified subgroups using relative comparisons of hazard ratios (HRs). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival, response rate, and safety. Key eligibility criteria included: (1) ≥1 prior platinum-based therapy, (2) Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 1, and 3) a smoking history of 100 cigarettes or more. RESULTS: A total of 201 patients were randomized. A trend toward improvement in OS favoring pralatrexate was observed with an HR of 0.84 (95% confidence interval: 0.61-1.14) in the intent-to-treat population. This favorable survival result was seen in most prespecified subgroups for pralatrexate. The largest reduction in the risk of death was observed in patients with nonsquamous cell carcinoma (n = 107; HR = 0.65; 95% confidence interval: 0.42-1.0). The most common grade 3 to 4 adverse event in the pralatrexate arm was mucositis (23%). Discontinuation of pralatrexate for any grade of mucositis was 21%. CONCLUSIONS: Pralatrexate demonstrated a trend toward improved survival relative to erlotinib in patients with advanced NSCLC. Future studies should include a mucositis management plan to improve tolerability and maximize treatment benefit.

The effect of bexarotene on atorvastatin pharmacokinetics: results from a phase I trial of bexarotene plus chemotherapy in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: Bexarotene (Targretin(®) capsules) is a retinoid-X-receptor agonist and an inducer of CYP3A4-mediated metabolism. This phase I trial evaluated the pharmacokinetic (PK) and drug-drug interactions of bexarotene with chemotherapy and a lipid-lowering agent (atorvastatin or fenofibrate). This trial was run in parallel with phase III trials of the combinations to determine whether repeated doses of bexarotene capsules affect the pharmacokinetics (PK) of the chemotherapeutic or the lipid-lowering agents. METHODS: Patients (n = 48) with advanced non-small cell lung cancer were treated with repetitive cycles of either paclitaxel/carboplatin or cisplatin/vinorelbine chemotherapy, bexarotene (400 mg/m(2)/day) administered continuously starting on day 4 of chemotherapy, and a lipid-lowering drug, either atorvastatin or fenofibrate, starting at least 5 days before chemotherapy due to hypertriglyceridemia induced by bexarotene. Extensive plasma sampling to characterize the PK profiles of the lipid-lowering drugs, relevant chemotherapy agents was performed on day 1 (without bexarotene) and during chemotherapy cycles 2 or 3 (with bexarotene). RESULTS: Here, we report the drug-drug interactions between the lipid-lowering agents and bexarotene. Mean atorvastatin clearance and dose-corrected AUC values were reduced by nearly 50% with the addition of concomitant bexarotene. As fenofibrate was less effective at controlling hypertriglyceridemia, too few patients received this agent to make any meaningful conclusions about drug-drug interactions. CONCLUSIONS: A drug-drug interaction was seen in this trial with bexarotene co-administration leading to a significant reduction in the AUC of atorvastatin. The likely mechanism for this interaction is through induction of CYP3A4 by bexarotene given the role of this enzyme in the metabolism of atorvastatin. Knowledge of this interaction is important for optimizing lipid management with atorvastatin for patients receiving bexarotene.

A phase I pharmacokinetic study of bexarotene with vinorelbine and cisplatin in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

PURPOSE: This is a phase I study of the retinoid X receptor agonist bexarotene (Targretin(®)) in combination with the chemotherapeutic drugs cisplatin and vinorelbine and lipid-lowering therapy. This study looked for pharmacokinetic (PK) interactions between the agents in parallel with a phase III study of the combination. METHODS: Patients (n = 26) with advanced-stage non-small-cell lung cancer received intravenous cisplatin 100 mg/m(2) on day 1 and at 4-week intervals plus intravenous vinorelbine 25 mg/m(2) weekly. Continuous oral bexarotene therapy (400 mg/m(2)/day) was initiated at day 4. Lipid-lowering therapy was initiated in all patients due to hypertriglyceridemia associated with bexarotene use. PK profiles of the chemotherapeutic agents were obtained on day 1 (without bexarotene) and during cycles 2-4 (with bexarotene). Vinorelbine (n = 18) and free cisplatin (n = 17) PK parameters in evaluable patients were determined using non-compartmental methods. RESULTS: Mean vinorelbine and free cisplatin clearance and dose-corrected AUC values with bexarotene were within 20% of respective values without concomitant bexarotene. Bexarotene levels did not vary with or without co-administration of the chemotherapeutic agents. There was no evidence of increased toxicity when bexarotene was co-administered with the chemotherapeutic agents. CONCLUSIONS: Bexarotene does not substantially affect vinorelbine or cisplatin PK, and the combination is well tolerated. The results are consistent with the mechanisms of elimination of vinorelbine (high metabolic clearance) and cisplatin (non-enzymatic and renal elimination).

Randomized phase II study of dulanermin in combination with paclitaxel, carboplatin, and bevacizumab in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of dulanermin combined with paclitaxel and carboplatin (PC) and bevacizumab (PCB) as first-line treatment for advanced or recurrent non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with squamous NSCLC and/or CNS metastases received PC every 3 weeks alone (arm 1) or with dulanermin 8 mg/kg for 5 days (arm 2). Patients with nonsquamous NSCLC received PCB alone (arm 3) or with dulanermin 8 mg/kg for 5 days (arm 4) or 20 mg/kg for 2 days (arm 5). The primary end point was the objective response rate (ORR). RESULTS: Overall, 213 patients were randomly assigned (arm 1, n = 41; arm 2, n = 39; arm 3, n = 42; arm 4, n = 40; arm 5, n = 41). The ORR in arms 1 to 5 was 39% (95% CI, 24% to 56%), 38% (95% CI, 24% to 54%), 50% (95% CI, 35% to 65%), 40% (95% CI, 25% to 56%), and 40% (95% CI, 25% to 56%), respectively. The odds ratio for ORR was 1.04 (P = 1.000) for arm 1 versus arm 2, 1.53 (P = .391) for arm 3 and versus arm 4, and 1.53 (P = .391) for arm 3 versus arm 5. The most common grade ≥ 3 adverse events were neutropenia, asthenia, anemia, thrombocytopenia, and hemoptysis. Of 161 available serum samples, a trend toward increased caspase-cleaved cytokeratin-18 was observed after dulanermin treatment in cycles 1 and 2. Among 84 patients evaluated for GalNT14 expression, there was a trend toward favorable progression-free survival and overall survival with dulanermin treatment in those with high GalNT14 expression. CONCLUSION: The addition of dulanermin to PC and PCB did not improve outcomes in unselected patients with previously untreated advanced or recurrent NSCLC.

First-cycle rash and survival in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer receiving cetuximab in combination with first-line chemotherapy: a subgroup analysis of data from the FLEX phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: The randomised phase 3 First-Line Erbitux in Lung Cancer (FLEX) study showed that the addition of cetuximab to cisplatin and vinorelbine significantly improved overall survival compared with chemotherapy alone in the first-line treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The main cetuximab-related side-effect was acne-like rash. Here, we assessed the association of this acne-like rash with clinical benefit. METHODS: We did a subgroup analysis of patients in the FLEX study, which enrolled patients with advanced NSCLC whose tumours expressed epidermal growth factor receptor. Our landmark analysis assessed if the development of acne-like rash in the first 21 days of treatment (first-cycle rash) was associated with clinical outcome, on the basis of patients in the intention-to-treat population alive on day 21. The FLEX study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00148798. FINDINGS: 518 patients in the chemotherapy plus cetuximab group-290 of whom had first-cycle rash-and 540 patients in the chemotherapy alone group were alive on day 21. Patients in the chemotherapy plus cetuximab group with first-cycle rash had significantly prolonged overall survival compared with patients in the same treatment group without first-cycle rash (median 15·0 months [95% CI 12·8-16·4] vs 8·8 months [7·6-11·1]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·631 [0·515-0·774]; p<0·0001). Corresponding significant associations were also noted for progression-free survival (median 5·4 months [5·2-5·7] vs 4·3 months [4·1-5·3]; HR 0·741 [0·607-0·905]; p=0·0031) and response (rate 44·8% [39·0-50·8] vs 32·0% [26·0-38·5]; odds ratio 1·703 [1·186-2·448]; p=0·0039). Overall survival for patients without first-cycle rash was similar to that of patients that received chemotherapy alone (median 8·8 months [7·6-11·1] vs 10·3 months [9·6-11·3]; HR 1·085 [0·910-1·293]; p=0·36). The significant overall survival benefit for patients with first-cycle rash versus without was seen in all histology subgroups: adenocarcinoma (median 16·9 months, [14·1-20·6] vs 9·3 months [7·7-13·2]; HR 0·614 [0·453-0·832]; p=0·0015), squamous-cell carcinoma (median 13·2 months [10·6-16·0] vs 8·1 months [6·7-12·6]; HR 0·659 [0·472-0·921]; p=0·014), and carcinomas of other histology (median 12·6 months [9·2-16·4] vs 6·9 months [5·2-11·0]; HR 0·616 [0·392-0·966]; p=0·033). INTERPRETATION: First-cycle rash was associated with a better outcome in patients with advanced NSCLC who received cisplatin and vinorelbine plus cetuximab as a first-line treatment. First-cycle rash might be a surrogate clinical marker that could be used to tailor cetuximab treatment for advanced NSCLC to those patients who would be most likely to derive a significant benefit.

Efficacy and safety of bevacizumab-based therapy in elderly patients with advanced or recurrent nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer in the phase III BO17704 study (AVAiL).

INTRODUCTION: The placebo-controlled, phase III AVAiL trial evaluated bevacizumab plus cisplatin and gemcitabine as first-line therapy in patients with advanced, nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer. A retrospective subgroup analysis was performed to assess the efficacy and safety of bevacizumab-based therapy in elderly patients aged 65 years or older in AVAiL. METHODS: Patients received cisplatin 80 mg/m and gemcitabine 1250 mg/m for up to six cycles plus 7.5 mg/kg bevacizumab, 15 mg/kg bevacizumab, or placebo every 3 weeks until disease progression. The primary end point was progression-free survival. Secondary endpoints included objective response rate, overall survival, and safety. RESULTS: Data were evaluated for 304 patients aged 65 years or older (median age 68 years). Most of the patients were Caucasian (87%) and the majority had adenocarcinoma (83%). In the combined bevacizumab arms, 143 patients (79%) completed ≥4 cycles of chemotherapy. Patients who received bevacizumab derived an improvement in progression-free survival compared with placebo (7.5 mg/kg bevacizumab: hazard ratio [HR] = 0.71, p = 0.023; 15 mg/kg bevacizumab: HR = 0.84, p = 0.25). Objective response rates were 40, 29, and 30% in the 7.5 mg/kg bevacizumab, 15 mg/kg bevacizumab, and placebo arms, respectively. Overall survival was similar for each bevacizumab arm versus placebo (7.5 mg/kg bevacizumab: HR = 0.84, p = 0.31; 15 mg/kg bevacizumab: HR = 0.88, p = 0.44). There were no particular safety signals of concern in elderly patients. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis of the randomized, phase III AVAiL trial shows that bevacizumab-based therapy improves outcomes for elderly patients with non-small cell lung cancer. Furthermore, bevacizumab-based therapy is well tolerated in elderly patients.

Nitrite in exhaled breath condensate as a marker of nitrossative stress in the airways of patients with asthma, COPD, and idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: Nitrite and nitrate are exhaled in droplets of an aerosol during breathing and can be assayed in the exhaled breath condensate (EBC) as markers of nitrossative stress in the airways of patients with asthma, COPD, and idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Using HPLC with fluorescence detection, nitrite and nitrate were assayed in EBC of 14 atopic patients with mild-to-moderate stable asthma, 18 atopic asthmatics with exacerbation, 14 COPD patients without exacerbation, 18 patients with exacerbated COPD, 13 patients with active IPF, and in 29 healthy subjects. RESULTS: The geometric mean [exp(mean±SD)] EBC concentrations of nitrite (micromol/l) in patients with asthma [5.1(2.1-12.3)], exacerbation of asthma [5.1(2.8-9.6)], exacerbation of COPD [5.3(3.2-8.7)], and with IPF [5.5(2.9-10.2)] were higher (P<0.05) compared with those of healthy subjects [2.9(1.6-5.3)] and patients with stable COPD [3.0(1.3-6.7)]. Nitrite concentration increased with decreased lung function of patients with asthma (r(s)=-0.31, P<0.02). Presumably owing to the contamination of the EBC sample with nitrate during collection, nitrate levels were highly variable among healthy subjects and higher compared with all groups of patients. CONCLUSION: EBC nitrite is a suitable marker of nitrossative stress in adult patients with lung diseases but cannot differentiate controlled and exacerbated asthma. Further improvements to the methods of EBC collection and sample handling are warranted.

Phase III trial comparing vinflunine with docetaxel in second-line advanced non-small-cell lung cancer previously treated with platinum-containing chemotherapy.

PURPOSE: To compare vinflunine (VFL) to docetaxel in patients with stage IIIB/IV non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who have experienced treatment failure with first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Randomized, multicenter, phase III study, 551 patients received either vinflunine 320 mg/m(2) or docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) every 21 days until disease progression or serious toxicity. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). The noninferiority analysis was based on a 10% difference (types I/II error rates: 5%/20%). Secondary end points included response rate (ORR), response duration, overall survival (OS), clinical benefit, quality of life (QOL), and safety. RESULTS: Median PFS was 2.3 months for each arm (HR, 1.004; 95% CI, 0.841 to 1.199). ORR, stable disease, median OS, were 4.4% versus 5.5%, 36.0% versus 39.6%, 6.7 versus 7.2 months (HR, 0.973; 95% CI, 0.805 to 1.176), respectively. No significant difference in patient benefit and QOL (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lung). No unexpected adverse events were observed. Grade higher than 0 (vinflunine v docetaxel) anemia (82.1% v 79.8%), neutropenia (49.3 v 39.02%), thrombocytopenia (30.6% v 14.3%), febrile neutropenia (3.3% v 4.7%), constipation (39.2% v 11.7%), fatigue (36.6% v 33.9%), injection site reaction (31.9% v 0.7%), nausea (26.7% v 23.7%), vomiting (23.8% v 14.2%), alopecia (19.8% v 35.4%), stomatis (19.4% v 12.4%), abdominal pain (20.1% v 3.6%), myalgia (14.7% v 6.6%), peripheral neuropathy (10.7% v 15.0%), arthralgia (7.0% v 7.7%), diarrhea (6.2% v 12.4%), edema (1.5% v 5.4%), and nail disorders (1.1% v 5;1%) were observed. CONCLUSION: This noninferiority phase III study showed similar efficacy end points for vinflunine and docetaxel. Despite higher rates of some adverse effects (anemia, abdominal pain, constipation, fatigue) the overall toxicity profile of vinflunine was manageable. Therefore, VFL may be another option in the second-line treatment of patients with advanced NSCLC.

Increased expression of inhibitor of apoptosis proteins, survivin and XIAP, in non-small cell lung carcinoma.

Members of the inhibitor of apoptosis protein (IAP) family, survivin and X-chromosome-linked IAP (XIAP), contribute to apoptosis resistance of cancer cells, and an increase in their expression may elevate the apoptotic threshold of malignant tumours during their growth and progression. In the present study, we investigated the expression status of survivin and its interactants hepatitis B X-interacting protein (HBXIP) and XIAP in non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) cell lines and NSCLC tumours and matched lungs from surgically treated patients in relation to their clinicopathological data. The expression of survivin, HBXIP and XIAP mRNAs was quantitated by real-time RT-PCR. The expression of survivin and XIAP proteins was analysed by Western blotting and ELISA. Survivin mRNA and protein levels were highly upregulated in NSCLC cells and tissues as compared to the lungs. In fact, the levels of survivin mRNA and protein in the tumours were more than 10-fold higher in 96 (64%) and 72 (82%) of the 150 and 88 examined NSCLC patients, respectively. The expression of survivin mRNA was higher in squamous cell lung carcinomas than in lung adenocarcinomas (LACs; P=0.003) and in less-differentiated tumours than in well-differentiated ones (P=0.007). The level of survivin protein was higher in stage IB and stage II+III tumours (P=0.049 and P=0.044), than in stage IA tumours. The BIRC5 promoter polymorphism at nucleotide -31 did not influence the expression of survivin mRNA and protein in NSCLC cells and tumours. HBXIP mRNA was abundantly expressed in NSCLC cell lines and NSCLC tumours and lungs, while its level was comparable in the tumours and lungs. The expression of XIAP mRNA in NSCLC cell lines and NSCLC tumours and lungs was not significantly different. However, the expression of XIAP protein was higher in NSCLC tumours, particularly in LACs, as compared to the lungs (P=0.017 and P=0.004). In conclusion, the overexpression of survivin in the majority of NSCLCs together with the abundant or upregulated expression of HBXIP and XIAP suggest that tumours are endowed with resistance against a variety of apoptosis-inducing conditions.

Multicenter phase II trial of YM155, a small-molecule suppressor of survivin, in patients with advanced, refractory, non-small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the antitumor activity and safety of YM155, a novel, small-molecule suppressor of survivin, as single-agent therapy in patients with previously treated, advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with stage IIIb/IV NSCLC who had experienced treatment failure during one or two prior chemotherapy regimens (at least one of which was platinum based) received YM155 as a continuous intravenous infusion (4.8 mg/m(2)/d) over 168 hours followed by observation for 14 days in 21-day treatment cycles. The primary end point was objective tumor response rate (ORR). Secondary end points included duration of stable disease (SD), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), safety and pharmacokinetic profiles, and pharmacodynamic evaluations. RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients received YM155. Two patients achieved a confirmed partial response, with an ORR of 5.4% (95% CI, 0.7% to 18.2%). An additional 14 patients (37.8%) achieved SD resulting in a disease control rate of 43.2% (95% CI, 27.1% to 60.5%). Median duration of PFS was 1.7 months (95% CI, 1.3 to 2.8 months). Median duration of OS was 6.6 months (95% CI, 4 to 12.2 months), with a 1-year survival rate of 35.1%. Treatment with YM155 was well tolerated with the majority of treatment discontinuations not treatment related. CONCLUSION: YM155 exhibited modest single-agent activity in patients with refractory, advanced NSCLC. A favorable safety/tolerability profile was reported. Further evaluation of YM155 in combination with chemotherapy and other targeted agents may be warranted.

Phase III trial of cisplatin plus gemcitabine with either placebo or bevacizumab as first-line therapy for nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer: AVAil.

PURPOSE: Bevacizumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting vascular endothelial growth factor, improves survival when combined with carboplatin/paclitaxel for advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This randomized phase III trial investigated the efficacy and safety of cisplatin/gemcitabine (CG) plus bevacizumab in this setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive cisplatin 80 mg/m2 and gemcitabine 1,250 mg/m(2) for up to six cycles plus low-dose bevacizumab (7.5 mg/kg), high-dose bevacizumab (15 mg/kg), or placebo every 3 weeks until disease progression. The trial was not powered to compare the two doses directly. The primary end point was amended from overall survival (OS) to progression-free survival (PFS). Between February 2005 and August 2006, 1,043 patients were randomly assigned (placebo, n = 347; low dose, n = 345; high dose, n = 351). RESULTS: PFS was significantly prolonged; the hazard ratios for PFS were 0.75 (median PFS, 6.7 v 6.1 months for placebo; P = .003) in the low-dose group and 0.82 (median PFS, 6.5 v 6.1 months for placebo; P = .03) in the high-dose group compared with placebo. Objective response rates were 20.1%, 34.1%, and 30.4% for placebo, low-dose bevacizumab, and high-dose bevacizumab plus CG, respectively. Duration of follow-up was not sufficient for OS analysis. Incidence of grade 3 or greater adverse events was similar across arms. Grade > or = 3 pulmonary hemorrhage rates were < or = 1.5% for all arms despite 9% of patients receiving therapeutic anticoagulation. CONCLUSION: Combining bevacizumab (7.5 or 15 mg/kg) with CG significantly improved PFS and objective response rate. Bevacizumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy offers clinical benefit for bevacizumab-eligible patients with advanced NSCLC.

Gefitinib versus vinorelbine in chemotherapy-naive elderly patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (INVITE): a randomized, phase II study.

PURPOSE: This phase II, open-label, parallel-group study compared gefitinib with vinorelbine in chemotherapy-naïve elderly patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: Chemotherapy-naïve patients (age >or= 70 years) were randomly assigned to gefitinib (250 mg/d orally) or vinorelbine (30 mg/m(2) infusion on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle). The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points were overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), quality of life (QOL), pulmonary symptom improvement (PSI), and tolerability. Exploratory end points included epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) gene copy number by fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH). RESULTS: Patients were randomly assigned to gefitinib (n = 97) or to vinorelbine (n = 99). Hazard ratios (HR; gefitinib v vinorelbine) were 1.19 (95% CI, 0.85 to 1.65) for PFS and 0.98 (95% CI, 0.66 to 1.47) for OS. ORR and disease control rates were 3.1% (95% CI, 0.6 to 8.8) and 43.3% (for gefitinib) and 5.1% (95% CI, 1.7 to 11.4) and 53.5% (for vinorelbine), respectively. Overall QOL improvement and PSI rates were 24.3% and 36.6% (for gefitinib) and 10.9% and 31.0% (for vinorelbine), respectively. In the 54 patients who were EGFR FISH-positive, HRs were 3.13 (95% CI, 1.45 to 6.76) for PFS and 2.88 (95% CI, 1.21 to 6.83) for OS. There were fewer treatment-related grade 3 to 5 adverse events with gefitinib (12.8%) than with vinorelbine (41.7%). CONCLUSION: There was no statistical difference between gefitinib and vinorelbine in efficacy in chemotherapy-naïve, unselected elderly patients with advanced NSCLC, but there was better tolerability with gefitinib. Individuals who were EGFR FISH-positive benefited more from vinorelbine than from gefitinib; this unexpected finding requires further study.

Randomized multicenter phase II study of larotaxel (XRP9881) in combination with cisplatin or gemcitabine as first-line chemotherapy in nonirradiable stage IIIB or stage IV non-small cell lung cancer.

INTRODUCTION: This randomized phase II study investigated the efficacy and safety of a new taxane, larotaxel (XRP9881), in combination with either cisplatin or gemcitabine in the first-line treatment of patients with nonirradiable stage IIIB or stage IV non-small cell lung cancer to select the combination having the most promising antitumor activity. METHODS: Patients received either larotaxel (50 mg/m) as a 1-hour infusion, followed by a 1-hour infusion of cisplatin (75 mg/m), every 3 weeks (arm A), or gemcitabine (800 mg/m) as a 30 minute infusion, on days 1 and 8, and larotaxel (60 mg/m) as a 1-hour infusion, on day 8 (following gemcitabine), every 3 weeks (arm B). The primary end point was the objective response rate (per-protocol population). RESULTS: Thirty-two patients were randomized to arm A and 30 to arm B. The response rate was higher in arm A compared with arm B in both the per-protocol (26.7% versus 18.2%) and intention-to-treat (28.1% versus 13.3%) populations. In the intention-to-treat population, median progression-free survival for arm A versus arm B was 4.7 versus 3.3 months and median overall survival was 8.6 versus 7.3 months, respectively. Fifty percent of patients in arm A and 66.7% in arm B experienced at least one National Cancer Institute common toxicity criteria grade 3/4 adverse event and grade 3/4 neutropenia was observed in 46.9% and 41.4% of patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Both larotaxel combinations were effective and manageable, however all measured efficacy parameters (response rate, progression free survival, and survival) seemed to favor the combination with cisplatin.

Symptom and quality of life results of an international randomised phase III study of adjuvant vaccination with Bec2/BCG in responding patients with limited disease small-cell lung cancer.

AIMS: This study reports the symptom and HRQOL results in which standard treatment was compared to standard therapy plus Bec2, an anti-idiotypic antibody that mimics GD3, a ganglioside antigen. METHODS: Five hundred and fifteen LD SCLC patients were randomised to receive five vaccinations of Bec2 (2.5mg)/BCG vaccine arm (VA) or an observational arm (OA) administered over a 10-week period. Survival was the primary end-point; HRQOL was a secondary end-point, assessed using the EORTC QLQ-C30/LC 13. RESULTS: There was no improvement in survival or progression-free survival in the vaccination arm. At baseline patients in both arms demonstrated significantly impaired scores on the global QOL scale, when compared to a normative population. However, HRQOL and symptom scores between the two treatment arms were not statistically different at any time point. CONCLUSION: We found no benefits to patient HRQOL by additional vaccination with Bec2/BCG to LD SCLC for patients who have been undergoing standard therapy.

Safety and efficacy of darbepoetin alpha in previously untreated extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer treated with platinum plus etoposide.

PURPOSE: A placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized, phase III study was conducted in patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer receiving first-line platinum-containing chemotherapy to determine if increasing or maintaining hemoglobin concentration with darbepoetin alpha could increase patient survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Darbepoetin alpha (300 microg) or placebo was administered once per week for 4 weeks then every 3 weeks for up to six cycles of chemotherapy (carboplatin plus etoposide or cisplatin plus etoposide) plus 3 weeks after the last dose of chemotherapy. Patients with disease progression were observed until death or until all patients completed their end-of-study visit and 496 deaths had occurred. The two coprimary end points were change in hemoglobin concentration from baseline to the end of the chemotherapy period and overall survival; statistical testing of survival was done if change in hemoglobin was significant at P < .05. RESULTS: The study enrolled 600 patients. Patients' hemoglobin levels dropped due to the myelosuppressive chemotherapy; however, treatment with darbepoetin alpha maintained hemoglobin levels significantly higher than placebo (P < .001). There was no statistically significant difference in overall survival between the treatment groups (hazard ratio [HR], 0.93; 95% CI, 0.78 to 1.11; P = .431). As expected, darbepoetin alpha was associated with a higher incidence of thromboembolic events (darbepoetin alpha, 9%; placebo, 5%). The transfusion risk was lower in the darbepoetin versus placebo group (HR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.29 to 0.55). CONCLUSION: The results of this study did not demonstrate improved survival after treatment with darbepoetin alpha; however, they reinforce the benefit of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents in reducing transfusions and their neutral impact on survival in patients with chemotherapy-induced anemia.

Randomized phase III trial comparing bexarotene (L1069-49)/cisplatin/vinorelbine with cisplatin/vinorelbine in chemotherapy-naive patients with advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer: SPIRIT I.

PURPOSE: This study evaluated whether the combination of the synthetic rexinoid bexarotene with first-line cisplatin/vinorelbine therapy provides additional survival benefit in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with stage IIIB with pleural effusion or stage IV NSCLC and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 to 1 were randomly assigned to open-label bexarotene 400 mg/m(2)/d with cisplatin/vinorelbine or to cisplatin/vinorelbine alone. Antilipid agents were initiated on or before day 1 in the bexarotene arm. Primary efficacy end point was overall survival. Primary, secondary and supportive efficacy analyses were conducted. RESULTS: A total of 623 patients (312 control, 311 bexarotene) were enrolled. Overall, no significant difference in survival occurred between the two treatment groups. However, an unplanned retrospective analysis showed that a subpopulation of bexarotene patients (n = 98 of 306) who experienced National Cancer Institute grade 3/4 hypertriglyceridemia had longer median survival compared with control patients (12.3 v 9.9 months; log-rank P = .08). Within that subgroup, those who benefited the most included males, smokers, those with stage IV disease, and those with a 6-month prior weight loss of 5% or more. Incidence, type and severity of grade 3/4 adverse events were comparable between arms, except for leukopenia (higher in chemotherapy arm) and hyperlipemia, hypothyroidism, dyspnea, and headache (higher in chemotherapy/bexarotene arm). CONCLUSION: The addition of bexarotene to first-line chemotherapy did not increase survival in patients with advanced NSCLC. However, a subgroup (32%) of bexarotene-treated patients developing high-grade hypertriglyceridemia appeared to have better survival (12.3 months) than controls; thus triglyceride response may be a biomarker of survival benefit with bexarotene.

Benefits of complementary therapy with insulin aspart versus human regular insulin in persons with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

BACKGROUND: Absorption rates of the phosphate-buffered insulin analogs aspart, lispro, and glulisine prevail over that of regular human insulin. The aim of this prospective observational open-label controlled study was to compare the effects of aspart and human regular insulin resulting from their sequential long-lasting routine administration in small preprandial boluses to individuals with type 2 diabetes according to identical algorithms. METHODS: Fifty-seven individuals with type 2 diabetes 64.0 +/- 1.29 (mean +/- SE) years old with diabetes' duration of 12.4 +/- 1.06 years, treated with human regular insulin for 5.2 +/- 0.44 years, and a serum C-peptide level of 1.1 +/- 0.10 nmol/L were enrolled into the study. Following two checkups performed in the course of the 364 +/- 17.9-day baseline period, human regular insulin was replaced with aspart in equivalent boluses, and two checkups in the course of 330 +/- 11.1-day sequential period were performed. The control group consisted of 17 individuals with type 2 diabetes 68.4 +/- 2.36 years old with diabetes' duration of 9.9 +/- 1.57 years, treated with insulin for 4.2 +/- 0.57 years, and a C-peptide level of 1.1 +/- 0.11 nmol/L. Data were analyzed using the statistical program SPSS version 10.1. (SPSS, Inc., Chicago, IL). RESULTS: Following the switch from human regular insulin to aspart, hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) decreased from 8.4 +/- 0.23% at baseline to 7.9 +/- 0.17% (P = 0.031), and thereafter to 7.5 +/- 0.20% (P < 0.001), while plasma glucose concentrations in 10-point profiles, daily insulin dose (37.1 +/- 1.39 IU/day), body mass index (BMI) (30.5 +/- 0.82 kg/m(2)), and frequency of hypo- and hyperglycemic episodes did not change (P > 0.05). Patients quote satisfaction was good. No adverse events were recorded. In the control group, no significant change of baseline HbA1c (8.4 +/- 0.54%), insulin dose (33.1 +/- 3.17 IU/day), and BMI (32.1 +/- 1.12 kg/m(2)) was found. CONCLUSION: Aspart appears to be more effective than human regular insulin for complementary insulin treatment in individuals with type 2 diabetes.

Cisplatin- versus carboplatin-based chemotherapy in first-line treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: an individual patient data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Because the efficacy of carboplatin and cisplatin in the treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has not been proven to be equivalent, an individual patient data meta-analysis comparing the two treatments was performed. METHODS: Randomized trials comparing carboplatin to cisplatin in first-line treatment of advanced NSCLC were identified and their electronic databases obtained. A general variance-based method was used to estimate the summary hazard ratios (HRs), odds ratios (ORs), and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for mortality, objective response, and toxicity. Cochran's chi-square test (Q test) was used to test for heterogeneity among trials, and the I2 index, which expresses the proportion of variability of the results due to heterogeneity, was calculated. A random-effects model that takes into account interstudy variation was also applied. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: Nine trials that included a total of 2968 patients were analyzed; overall median follow-up was 1021 days. The objective response rate was higher for patients treated with cisplatin than for patients treated with carboplatin (30% versus 24%, respectively; OR = 1.37; 95% CI = 1.16 to 1.61; P<.001). Carboplatin treatment was associated with a non-statistically significant increase in the hazard of mortality relative to treatment with cisplatin (HR = 1.07; 95% CI = 0.99 to 1.15; P = .100). In patients with nonsquamous tumors and those treated with third-generation chemotherapy, carboplatin-based chemotherapy was associated with a statistically significant increase in mortality (HR = 1.12; 95% CI = 1.01 to 1.23 and HR = 1.11; 95% CI = 1.01 to 1.21, respectively). Cisplatin-based chemotherapy was associated with more severe nausea and vomiting and nephrotoxicity; severe thrombocytopenia was more frequent during carboplatin-based chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Our individual patient data meta-analysis suggests that cisplatin-based chemotherapy is slightly superior to carboplatin-based chemotherapy in terms of response rate and, in certain subgroups, in prolonging survival without being associated with an increase in severe toxic effects. Therefore, cisplatin-based third-generation regimens should remain the standard reference for the treatment of selected patients with advanced-stage NSCLC and of those with earlier-stage disease.