Diamond: immunohistochemistry versus sequencing in EGFR analysis of lung adenocarcinomas.

AIMS: Identification of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations in lung adenocarcinomas is the single most important predictor of clinical response and outcome using EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). EGFR E746-A750del and L858R mutations are the most common gene alterations, also predicting the best clinical response to TKIs. We evaluated the accuracy of EGFR mutation-specific antibodies in a large cohort of lung adenocarcinomas, with different molecular settings and types of tissue samples. METHODS: 300 lung adenocarcinomas diagnosed on cytology (48 cell blocks), biopsy (157 cases) and surgical resections (95 cases) were selected. All cases were investigated for EGFR by sequencing and two mutation-specific antibodies (clone 6B6 for E746-A750del; clone 43B2 for L858R) were tested using an automated immunostainer. Discordant results were investigated by next-generation sequencing (NGS). RESULTS: Overall sensitivity and specificity of mutant-specific antibodies were 58.6% and 98.0%, respectively, and they increased up to 84% and 100% if only tumours harbouring E746-A750del were considered. In 13 discordant cases, NGS confirmed immunohistochemistry results in eight samples. CONCLUSIONS: The EGFR mutation-specific antibodies have a fair/good sensitivity and good/high specificity in identifying classic mutations, but they cannot replace molecular tests. The antibodies work equally well on biopsies and cell blocks, possibly permitting a rapid screening in cases with poor material.

The value of lactate dehydrogenase serum levels as a prognostic and predictive factor for advanced pancreatic cancer patients receiving sorafenib.

Although lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) serum levels, indirect markers of angiogenesis, are associated with a worse outcome in several tumours, their prognostic value is not defined in pancreatic cancer. Moreover, high levels are associated even with a lack of efficacy of tyrosine kinase inhibitors, contributing to explain negative results in clinical trials. We assessed the role of LDH in advanced pancreatic cancer receiving sorafenib. Seventy-one of 114 patients included in the randomised phase II trial MAPS (chemotherapy plus or not sorafenib) and with available serum LDH levels, were included in this analysis. Patients were categorized according to serum LDH levels (LDH ≤ vs.> upper normal rate). A significant difference was found in progression free survival (PFS) and in overall survival (OS) between patients with LDH values under or above the cut-off (PFS: 5.2 vs. 2.7 months, p = 0.0287; OS: 10.7 vs. 5.9 months, p = 0.0021). After stratification according to LDH serum levels and sorafenib treatment, patients with low LDH serum levels treated with sorafenib showed an advantage in PFS (p = 0.05) and OS (p = 0.0012). LDH appears to be a reliable parameter to assess the prognosis of advanced pancreatic cancer patients, and it may be a predictive parameter to select patients candidate to receive sorafenib.

Pei regimen: a therapeutic option in small cell lung cancer? A retrospective monoinstitutional analysis of 46 consecutive cases.

OBJECTIVES: Combination chemotherapy is very active in small cell lung cancer (SCLC), although no improvement in overall survival (OS) has been done in the last 25 years, with Cisplatin-Etoposide (PE) still considered the world-wide standard, with an average median survival of about 7-8 months in patients with extended disease (ED). In 1995, a randomized trial of the Hoosier Group in 171 ED patients showed a significant advantage in overall survival in patients treated with PEI (Cisplatin, Etoposide and Ifosfamide), compared to PE. Despite that, PEI regimen has not become a commonly used regimen in SCLC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Here we present a retrospective analysis of 46 consecutive patients (30 males and 16 females) with SCLC that were treated at our Institution with PEI regimen: Cisplatin 20 mg/m2, Etoposide 75 mg/m2 and Ifosfamide 1200 mg/m2, day 1 to 4, every 3 weeks. Patients received a total of 219 cycles of chemotherapy, with a mean of 4,7 cycles per patient. Median age was 63 (range 59-70); performance status (PS) was 0 in 29 patients (63%), 1 in 13 patients (28%) and 2 in 4 patients (9%). RESULTS: In 19 limited disease (LD) patients partial response (PR) rate was 74%, and complete response (CR) was 16%. In 27 ED patients we observed 63% of PR and 26% of CR. Median time to progression (TTP) was 15.2 months in LD and 7.1 months in ED with median overall survival (OS) of 28.2 and 11.8 months, respectively. Toxicity was manageable, with a high dose intensity. CONCLUSIONS: PEI regimen, in our opinion, may be a possible therapeutic option, with high activity and an acceptable toxicity profile. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02324296 . INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD THAT APPROVED THE STUDY: Institutional review board of Reggio Emilia, Azienda Ospedaliera S.Maria Nuova/IRCCS.

Fluorouracil and dose-dense chemotherapy in adjuvant treatment of patients with early-stage breast cancer: an open-label, 2 × 2 factorial, randomised phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Whether addition of fluorouracil to epirubicin, cyclophosphamide, and paclitaxel (EC-P) is favourable in adjuvant treatment of patients with node-positive breast cancer is controversial, as is the benefit of increased density of dosing. We aimed to address these questions in terms of improvements in disease-free survival. METHODS: In this 2 × 2 factorial, open-label, phase 3 trial, we enrolled patients aged 18-70 years with operable, node positive, early-stage breast cancer from 81 Italian centres. Eligible patients were randomly allocated in a 1:1:1:1 ratio with a centralised, interactive online system to receive either dose-dense chemotherapy (administered intravenously every 2 weeks with pegfilgrastim support) with fluorouracil plus EC-P (FEC-P) or EC-P or to receive standard-interval chemotherapy (administered intravenously every 3 weeks) with FEC-P or EC-P. The primary study endpoint was disease-free survival, assessed with the Kaplan-Meier method in the intention-to-treat population. Our primary comparisons were between dose schedule (every 2 weeks vs every 3 weeks) and dose type (FEC-P vs EC-P). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00433420. FINDINGS: Between April 24, 2003, and July 3, 2006, we recruited 2091 patients. 88 patients were enrolled in centres that only provided standard-intensity dosing. After a median follow-up of 7·0 years (interquartile range [IQR] 4·5-6·3), 140 (26%) of 545 patients given EC-P every 3 weeks, 157 (29%) of 544 patients given FEC-P every 3 weeks, 111 (22%) of 502 patients given EC-P every 2 weeks, and 113 (23%) of 500 patients given FEC-P every 2 weeks had a disease-free survival event. For the dose-density comparison, disease-free survival at 5 years was 81% (95% CI 79-84) in patients treated every 2 weeks and 76% (74-79) in patients treated every 3 weeks (HR 0·77, 95% CI 0·65-0·92; p=0·004); overall survival rates at 5 years were 94% (93-96) and 89% (87-91; HR 0·65, 0·51-0·84; p=0·001) and for the chemotherapy-type comparison, disease-free survival at 5 years was 78% (75-81) in the FEC-P groups and 79% (76-82) in the EC-P groups (HR 1·06, 0·89-1·25; p=0·561); overall survival rates at 5 years were 91% (89-93) and 92% (90-94; 1·16, 0·91-1·46; p=0·234). Compared with 3 week dosing, chemotherapy every 2 weeks was associated with increased rate of grade 3-4 of anaemia (14 [1·4%] of 988 patients vs two [0·2%] of 984 patients; p=0·002); transaminitis (19 [1·9%] vs four [0·4%]; p=0·001), and myalgias (31 [3·1%] vs 16 [1·6%]; p=0·019), and decreased rates of grade 3-4 neutropenia (147 [14·9%] vs 433 [44·0%]; p<0·0001). Addition of fluorouracil led to increased rates of grade 3-4 neutropenia (354 [34·5%] of 1025 patients on FEC-P vs 250 [24·2%] of 1032 patients on EC-P; p<0·0001), fever (nine [0·9%] vs two [0·2%]), nausea (47 [4·6%] vs 28 [2·7%]), and vomiting (32 [3·1%] vs 15 [1·4%]). INTERPRETATION: In patients with node-positive early breast cancer, dose-dense adjuvant chemotherapy improved disease-free survival compared with standard interval chemotherapy. Addition of fluorouracil to a sequential EC-P regimen was not associated with an improved disease-free survival outcome. FUNDING: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pharmacia, and Dompè Biotec.

Preoperative carboplatin-paclitaxel-bevacizumab in triple-negative breast cancer: final results of the phase II Ca.Pa.Be study.

PURPOSE: The phase II Ca.Pa.Be trial evaluated preoperative carboplatin-paclitaxel in combination with bevacizumab in triple-negative breast cancer patients with previously untreated stage II-III disease. The primary aim was the assessment of the rate of pathologic complete response (pCR). Secondary aims included safety, breast-conserving surgery rate, and early response assessment with dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI). METHODS: Patients with hormone receptor-negative, HER-2-negative stage II-III breast cancer were eligible. Treatment included paclitaxel 80 mg/mq + carboplatin area under the curve (AUC) 2 on days 1, 8, and 15, combined with bevacizumab 10 mg/kg on days 1 and 15 each 28 days, for 5 courses. At baseline, patients underwent breast DCE-MRI, followed by a single dose of bevacizumab 5 mg/kg (day -6). DCE-MRI was repeated before the initiation of chemotherapy. RESULTS: Forty-four patients were enrolled. Forty-three patients underwent surgery, and 22 (50 %) received breast-conserving surgery (conversion rate from mastectomy indication at baseline, 34.4 %). A pCR in breast and axillary lymph nodes occurred in 22 patients (50 %). Bevacizumab-associated adverse events (AEs) were mild: G1-2 hypertension and bleeding occurred in 6 (13.6 %) and 12 (27 %) patients, respectively. No G4 nonhematologic AEs were recorded. More frequent G3 AEs were liver function test abnormalities (6.8 %), and diarrhea and fatigue (4.5 % each). The only G3-4 hematologic toxicity was neutropenia (G3, 25 %; G4, 9 %). Early assessed DCE-MRI response parameters failed to predict pCR. CONCLUSIONS: The neoadjuvant anthracycline-free combination of weekly paclitaxel and carboplatin plus bevacizumab is active and safe in triple-negative breast cancer, and the rate of pCR is comparable to that observed with more intensive carboplatin- and bevacizumab-containing regimens. Further investigation is warranted.

Refining sorafenib therapy: lessons from clinical practice.

Understanding the best use of sorafenib is essential in order to maximize clinical benefit in hepatocellular carcinoma. Based on Phase III and noninterventional study data, as well as our extensive experience, we discuss dose modification in order to manage adverse events, disease response evaluation and how to maximize treatment benefit. Sorafenib should be initiated at the approved dose (400 mg twice daily) and reduced/interrupted as appropriate in order to manage adverse events. Dose modification should be considered before discontinuation. Appropriate tumor response assessment is critical. Focusing on radiologic response may result in premature sorafenib discontinuation; symptomatic progression should also be considered. If second-line therapies or trials are unavailable, continuing sorafenib beyond radiologic progression may provide a clinical benefit. Our recommendations enable the maximization of treatment duration, and hence clinical benefit, for patients.

A case of necrotizing vasculitis with panniculitis, during sorafenib treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma, appeared in disease progression.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the sixth most common cancer worldwide and is the third most common cause of death from cancer. Sorafenib is the only drug which improves survival in first line advanced HCC. Sorafenib has been associated with several dermatologic toxicities and toxic effects have been related to a better treatment response. We report the case of a well-circumscribed panniculitis and necrotizing vasculitis due to sorafenib, appeared in disease progression in a man affected by advanced HCC.

Concomitant EGFR mutation and ALK rearrangement in lung adenocarcinoma is more frequent than expected: report of a case and review of the literature with demonstration of genes alteration into the same tumor cells.

Oncogenic drivers in lung non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are considered mutually exclusive, but a review of the literature reveals that concomitant EGFR mutations and ALK rearrangement may occur in a subset of NSCLC. We report here a case of pulmonary adenocarcinoma with concomitant EGFR mutation in exon 21 (L858R) and ALK rearrangement in naive and relapsed tumors. Tumor cells seem to harbor both gene alterations and the patient had a long-lasting response both to EGFR inhibitor in second line and ALK inhibitor once tumor progressed. A speculative discussion on molecular mechanisms underlying this uncommon phenomenon and practical points about epidemiologic, clinicopathologic features and therapeutic options in this intriguing subset of double-positive tumor are reported.

Initial therapy with FOLFOXIRI and bevacizumab for metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: A fluoropyrimidine plus irinotecan or oxaliplatin, combined with bevacizumab (a monoclonal antibody against vascular endothelial growth factor), is standard first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer. Before the introduction of bevacizumab, chemotherapy with fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan (FOLFOXIRI) showed superior efficacy as compared with fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI). In a phase 2 study, FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab showed promising activity and an acceptable rate of adverse effects. METHODS: We randomly assigned 508 patients with untreated metastatic colorectal cancer to receive either FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab (control group) or FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab (experimental group). Up to 12 cycles of treatment were administered, followed by fluorouracil plus bevacizumab until disease progression. The primary end point was progression-free survival. RESULTS: The median progression-free survival was 12.1 months in the experimental group, as compared with 9.7 months in the control group (hazard ratio for progression, 0.75; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.62 to 0.90; P=0.003). The objective response rate was 65% in the experimental group and 53% in the control group (P=0.006). Overall survival was longer, but not significantly so, in the experimental group (31.0 vs. 25.8 months; hazard ratio for death, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.63 to 1.00; P=0.054). The incidences of grade 3 or 4 neurotoxicity, stomatitis, diarrhea, and neutropenia were significantly higher in the experimental group. CONCLUSIONS: FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab, as compared with FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab, improved the outcome in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer and increased the incidence of some adverse events. (Funded by the Gruppo Oncologico Nord Ovest and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00719797.).

Sorafenib efficacy in thymic carcinomas seems not to require c-KIT or PDGFR-alpha mutations.

PURPOSE: To retrospectively evaluate sorafenib activity and safety in patients with metastatic thymic carcinoma (TC) and to correlate outcome with c-KIT and PDGFR-alpha mutational status. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with metastatic thymic carcinoma treated with sorafenib after at least one prior line of chemotherapy were included. Objective response rate (ORR) and toxicity were evaluated. Analysis of c-KIT and PDGFR-alpha mutational status was performed retrospectively. RESULTS: From October 2007 to August 2011, 5 patients with metastatic thymic carcinoma were evaluated. A median of 8 cycles of sorafenib (range=3-29) were administered. Two patients (40%) displayed a partial response (PR), two patients presented stable disease (SD), while one patient had progression. The median progression-free (PFS) and overall survival were 28 weeks and 92 weeks, respectively. At mutational analysis, only one patient with PR had c-KIT mutation in exon 17 and was successfully treated with sunitinib for 12 months after progression to sorafenib. No PDGFR-alpha mutations were found. CONCLUSION: Sorafenib activity seems independent from the c-KIT and PDGFR-alpha mutational status. After progression, sequence treatment with a different tyrosine kinase inhibitor can be considered. These results are promising and need further confirmation on larger, possibly prospective, series of patients.

Therapeutic activity of testosterone in metastatic breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Hormone therapy plays an important role in the management of breast cancer. In the past, testosterone was the most common line of hormonal therapy for this disease, but its use has been almost completely abandoned in the past 40 years. However, because of earlier reports on favorable therapeutic results, we re-evaluated its use for treatment of hormone-responsive patients who have become refractory to other lines of hormonal therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifty-three consecutive patients with positive metastatic breast cancer who had become refractory to treatment with other hormones and whose disease was progressing, were treated with testosterone propionate, 250 mg once every two weeks, twice, and then once every four weeks until disease progression, drug toxicity, or death. RESULTS: Regression of disease was seen in 9 patients (17%; 2% complete and 15% partial). Stabilization of disease was seen in 22 patients (41.5%). In the remaining 22 patients (41,5%), the disease progressed. Median overall survival was 12 months from beginning of testosterone treatment. Hirsutism and dysphonia were noted occasionally, but were not distressing enough to mandate cessation of treatment. There was no major toxicity except for two non-fatal pulmonary emboli. CONCLUSION: Testosterone showed a significant therapeutic activity in previously hormone-treated patients with metastatic breast cancer who were no longer responding to such treatment and whose disease was progressing. These results warrant consideration of testosterone use as treatment for patients with hormone-sensitive metastatic breast cancer.

Double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter, randomized, phase IIb neoadjuvant study of letrozole-lapatinib in postmenopausal hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, operable breast cancer.

PURPOSE: This is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study aimed to evaluate the clinical and biologic effects of letrozole plus lapatinib or placebo as neoadjuvant therapy in hormone receptor (HR) -positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) -negative operable breast cancer. METHODS: Ninety-two postmenopausal women with stage II to IIIA primary breast cancer were randomly assigned to preoperative therapy consisting of 6 months of letrozole 2.5 mg orally daily plus lapatinib 1,500 mg orally daily or placebo. Surgery was performed within 2 weeks from the last study medication. Clinical response was assessed by ultrasonography. Pre- and post-treatment samples were evaluated for selected biomarkers. Fresh-frozen tissue samples were collected for genomic analyses. RESULTS: Numerically similar clinical response rates (partial + complete response) were observed (70% for letrozole-lapatinib and 63% for letrozole-placebo). Toxicities were generally mild and manageable. A significant decrease in Ki-67 and pAKT expression from baseline to surgery was observed in both arms. Overall, 34 patients (37%) had a mutation in PIK3CA exon 9 or 20. In the letrozole-lapatinib arm, the probability of achieving a clinical response was significantly higher in the presence of PIK3CA mutation (objective response rate, 93% v 63% in PIK3CA wild type; P = .040). CONCLUSION: The combination of letrozole-lapatinib in early breast cancer was feasible, with expected and manageable toxicities. In unselected estrogen receptor-positive/HER2-negative patients, letrozole-lapatinib and letrozole-placebo resulted in a similar overall clinical response rate and similar effect on Ki-67 and pAKT. Our secondary end point findings of a significant correlation between PIK3CA mutation and response to letrozole-lapatinib in HR-positive/HER2-negative early breast cancer must now be independently confirmed.

Sorafenib does not improve efficacy of chemotherapy in advanced pancreatic cancer: A GISCAD randomized phase II study.

BACKGROUND: The RAF-MEK-ERK pathway is commonly activated in pancreatic cancer because of a high frequency of KRAS-BRAF mutations. A phase II randomized trial was designed to investigate the activity of sorafenib in combination with chemotherapy in advanced pancreatic cancer. METHODS: Locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive cisplatin plus gemcitabine with sorafenib 400mg bid (arm A) or without sorafenib (arm B). RESULTS: One hundred and fourteen patients were enrolled; of these, 43 (74.6%) patients progressed in arm A and 44 (82.4%) in arm B. Median progression-free survival was 4.3 months (95% CI: 2.7-6.5) and 4.5 months (95% CI: 2.5-5.2), respectively (HR=0.92; 95% CI: 0.62-1.35). Median overall survival was 7.5 (95% CI: 5.6-9.7) and 8.3 months (95% CI: 6.2-8.7), respectively (HR=0.95; 95% CI: 0.62-1.48). Response rates were 3.4% in arm A and 3.6% in arm B. CONCLUSIONS: Sorafenib does not significantly enhance activity of chemotherapy in advanced pancreatic cancer patients, and therefore should not be assessed in phase III trials.

A phase II randomized dose escalation trial of sorafenib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Sorafenib has proven survival benefits in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The viability of continuing sorafenib at a higher dosage in patients who experienced radiologic disease progression was investigated. METHODS: Patients who experienced disease progression while on sorafenib 400 mg twice daily were randomized to sorafenib 600 mg twice daily (n = 49) or best supportive care (n = 52). The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Time to progression, overall survival, and safety were also evaluated. RESULTS: The study did not meet its primary end point. The difference in PFS between the sorafenib arm (3.91 months) and the best supportive care arm (2.69 months) did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.086). Adverse events were mainly grade 1-2 and similar across both groups. In the sorafenib arm, the most frequent events were diarrhea (80%), weight loss (75%), fatigue (67%), hand-foot-skin reaction (49%), abdominal pain (37%), and stomatitis (26%). CONCLUSIONS: Escalated-dose sorafenib in patients with advanced HCC who progressed while on sorafenib, failed to provide any clinical benefit. Second-line treatment still remains an open issue to be explored in appropriate clinical trials.

Fluoropyrimidine toxicity in patients with dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase splice site variant: the need for further revision of dose and schedule.

Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) is a key enzyme in the metabolic catabolism of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and its derivatives (capecitabine and tegafur). Complete or partial deficiency of DPD activity has been demonstrated to induce severe toxicities in cancer patients treated with fluoropyrimidine therapy. We analyzed 180 individuals that were candidates for a treatment with 5-FU class drugs for the most common DPD mutation, IVS14+1G>A, and detected four heterozygous patients. We recorded the toxicities for all 180 individuals after the first two chemotherapy cycles and found that three of the four patients, although they were treated with a dose reduction in 50 % on the basis of the genetic analysis, all showed severe toxicities that resulted in hospitalization of patient and premature discontinuation of treatment. One patient with mutated DPD was not treated with chemotherapy upon the clinician's decision because of his DPD mutated genotype and the presence of microsatellite instability. Our data suggest that greater dose reductions or alternative therapies are needed for patients with DPD IVS14+1G>A mutations.

Could interferon still play a role in metastatic renal cell carcinoma? A randomized study of two schedules of sorafenib plus interferon-alpha 2a (RAPSODY).

BACKGROUND: Sorafenib has proven efficacy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Interferon (IFN) has antiangiogenic activity that is thought to be both dose- and administration-schedule dependent. OBJECTIVE: To compare two different schedules of IFN combined with sorafenib. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Single-stage, prospective, noncomparative, randomized, open-label, multicenter, phase 2 study on previously untreated patients with mRCC and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-2. INTERVENTION: Sorafenib 400mg twice daily plus subcutaneous IFN, 9 million units (MU) three times a week (Arm A) or 3 MU five times a week (Arm B). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Primary end points were progression-free survival (PFS) for each arm and safety. Data were evaluated according to an intent-to-treat analysis. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 101 patients were evaluated. Median PFS was 7.9 mo in Arm A and 8.6 mo in Arm B (p=0.049) and the median duration of response was 8.5 and 19.2 mo, respectively (p=0.0013). Nine partial responses were observed in Arm A, and three complete and 14 partial responses were observed in Arm B (17.6% vs 34.0%; p=0.058); 24 and 21 patients (47% and 42%), respectively, achieved stable disease. The most common grade 3-4 toxicities were fatigue plus asthenia (28% vs 16%; p=0.32) and hand-foot skin reactions (20% vs 18%). CONCLUSIONS: Sorafenib plus frequent low-dose IFN showed good efficacy and tolerability. Further investigations should be warranted to identify a possible positioning of this intriguing regimen (6% complete response rate) in the treatment scenario of mRCC.

Tivantinib for second-line treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a randomised, placebo-controlled phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: Tivantinib (ARQ 197), a selective oral inhibitor of MET, has shown promising antitumour activity in hepatocellular carcinoma as monotherapy and in combination with sorafenib. We aimed to assess efficacy and safety of tivantinib for second-line treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: In this completed, multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 2 study, we enrolled patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma and Child-Pugh A cirrhosis who had progressed on or were unable to tolerate first-line systemic therapy. We randomly allocated patients 2:1 to receive tivantinib (360 mg twice-daily) or placebo until disease progression. The tivantinib dose was amended to 240 mg twice-daily because of high incidence of treatment-emergent grade 3 or worse neutropenia. Randomisation was done centrally by an interactive voice-response system, stratified by Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status and vascular invasion. The primary endpoint was time to progression, according to independent radiological review in the intention-to-treat population. We assessed tumour samples for MET expression with immunohistochemistry (high expression was regarded as ≥2+ in ≥50% of tumour cells). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00988741. FINDINGS: 71 patients were randomly assigned to receive tivantinib (38 at 360 mg twice-daily and 33 at 240 mg twice-daily); 36 patients were randomly assigned to receive placebo. At the time of analysis, 46 (65%) patients in the tivantinib group and 26 (72%) of those in the placebo group had progressive disease. Time to progression was longer for patients treated with tivantinib (1·6 months [95% CI 1·4-2·8]) than placebo (1·4 months [1·4-1·5]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·64, 90% CI 0·43-0·94; p=0·04). For patients with MET-high tumours, median time to progression was longer with tivantinib than for those on placebo (2·7 months [95% CI 1·4-8·5] for 22 MET-high patients on tivantinib vs 1·4 months [1·4-1·6] for 15 MET-high patients on placebo; HR 0·43, 95% CI 0·19-0·97; p=0·03). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events in the tivantinib group were neutropenia (ten patients [14%] vs none in the placebo group) and anaemia (eight [11%] vs none in the placebo group). Eight patients (21%) in the tivantinib 360 mg group had grade 3 or worse neutropenia compared with two (6%) patients in the 240 mg group. Four deaths related to tivantinib occurred from severe neutropenia. 24 (34%) patients in the tivantinib group and 14 (39%) patients in the placebo group had serious adverse events. INTERPRETATION: Tivantinib could provide an option for second-line treatment of patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma and well-compensated liver cirrhosis, particularly for patients with MET-high tumours. Confirmation in a phase 3 trial is needed, with a starting dose of tivantinib 240 mg twice-daily. FUNDING: ArQule, Daiichi Sankyo (Daiichi Sankyo Group).

Pemetrexed versus pemetrexed and carboplatin as second-line chemotherapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: results of the GOIRC 02-2006 randomized phase II study and pooled analysis with the NVALT7 trial.

PURPOSE: To compare efficacy of pemetrexed versus pemetrexed plus carboplatin in pretreated patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced NSCLC, in progression during or after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy, were randomly assigned to receive pemetrexed (arm A) or pemetrexed plus carboplatin (arm B). Primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). A preplanned pooled analysis of the results of this study with those of the NVALT7 study was carried out to assess the impact of carboplatin added to pemetrexed in terms of overall survival (OS). RESULTS: From July 2007 to October 2009, 239 patients (arm A, n = 120; arm B, n = 119) were enrolled. Median PFS was 3.6 months for arm A versus 3.5 months for arm B (hazard ratio [HR], 1.05; 95% CI, 0.81 to 1.36; P = .706). No statistically significant differences in response rate, OS, or toxicity were observed. A total of 479 patients were included in the pooled analysis. OS was not improved by the addition of carboplatin to pemetrexed (HR, 90; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.10; P = .316; P heterogeneity = .495). In the subgroup analyses, the addition of carboplatin to pemetrexed in patients with squamous tumors led to a statistically significant improvement in OS from 5.4 to 9 months (adjusted HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.91; P interaction test = .039). CONCLUSION: Second-line treatment of advanced NSCLC with pemetrexed plus carboplatin does not improve survival outcomes as compared with single-agent pemetrexed. The benefit observed with carboplatin addition in squamous tumors may warrant further investigation.

Adjuvant therapy with fluorouracil and oxaliplatin in stage II and elderly patients (between ages 70 and 75 years) with colon cancer: subgroup analyses of the Multicenter International Study of Oxaliplatin, Fluorouracil, and Leucovorin in the Adjuvant Treatment of Colon Cancer trial.

PURPOSE: Oxaliplatin combined with fluoropyrimidine improves survival in patients with stage III colon cancer. However, adjuvant chemotherapy with oxaliplatin is controversial in stage II and elderly patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed subgroup analyses of stage II and elderly patients randomly assigned fluorouracil with leucovorin (FL) ± oxaliplatin (FOLFOX4) in the Multicenter International Study of Oxaliplatin/Fluorouracil/Leucovorin in the Adjuvant Treatment of Colon Cancer study. Comorbidities, severe adverse events, second cancers, management of relapse and death as a result of causes than other colon cancer were studied. RESULTS: Two thousand two hundred forty-six patients were enrolled. Overall, 899 patients had stage II disease, including 330 low-risk and 569 high-risk patients. A total of 315 patients were ages 70 to 75 years. For stage II patients, the hazard ratio (HR) for comparing FOLFOX4 with FL was 0.84 (95% CI, 0.62 to 01.14) for disease-free survival (DFS), 0.70 (95% CI, 0.49 to 0.99) for time to recurrence (TTR), and 1.00 (95% CI, 0.70 to 1.41) for overall survival (OS). There was no interaction between treatment and stage or age. Low-risk stage II patients did not benefit from oxaliplatin. In high-risk stage II patients, the HR comparing FOLFOX4 with FL was 0.72 (95% CI, 0.51 to 1.01) for DFS, 0.62 (95% CI, 0.41 to 0.92) for TTR, and 0.91 (95% CI, 0.61 to 1.36) for OS. In elderly patients, the HR comparing FOLFOX4 with FL was 0.93 (95% CI, 0.64 to 1.35) for DFS, 0.72 (95% CI, 0.47 to 1.11) for TTR, and 1.10 (95% CI, 0.73 to 1.65) for OS. CONCLUSION: The results of these subset analyses show no statistically significant benefit (OS and DFS) for the addition of oxaliplatin to FL as adjuvant treatment for either stage II and elderly patients.

Preoperative chemotherapy plus trastuzumab, lapatinib, or both in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive operable breast cancer: results of the randomized phase II CHER-LOB study.

PURPOSE: This is a noncomparative, randomized, phase II trial of preoperative taxane-anthracycline in combination with trastuzumab, lapatinib, or combined trastuzumab plus lapatinib in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) -positive, stage II to IIIA operable breast cancer. The primary aim was to estimate the percentage of pathologic complete response (pCR; no invasive tumor in breast and axillary nodes). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In the three arms, chemotherapy consisted of weekly paclitaxel (80 mg/m(2)) for 12 weeks followed by fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide for four courses every 3 weeks. The patients randomly assigned to arm A received a 4-mg loading dose of trastuzumab followed by 2 mg weekly; in arm B patients received lapatinib 1,500 mg orally (PO) daily; and in arm C, patients received trastuzumab and lapatinib 1,000 mg PO daily. RESULTS: A total of 121 patients were randomly assigned. Diarrhea and dermatologic and hepatic toxicities were observed more frequently in patients receiving lapatinib. No episodes of congestive heart failure were observed. The rates of breast-conserving surgery were 66.7%, 57.9%, and 68.9% in arms A, B and C, respectively. The pCR rates were 25% (90% CI, 13.1% to 36.9%) in arm A, 26.3% (90% CI, 14.5% to 38.1%) in arm B, and 46.7% (90% CI, 34.4% to 58.9%) in arm C (exploratory P = .019). CONCLUSION: The primary end point of the study was met, with a relative increase of 80% in the pCR rate achieved with chemotherapy plus trastuzumab and lapatinib compared with chemotherapy plus either trastuzumab or lapatinib. These data add further evidence supporting the superiority of a dual-HER2 inhibition for the treatment of HER2-positive breast cancer.