Cyclophosphamide and tucotuzumab (huKS-IL2) following first-line chemotherapy in responding patients with extensive-disease small-cell lung cancer.

The humanized KS-interleukin-2, tucotuzumab (huKS-IL2; EMD 273066), is an EpCAM-specific immunocytokine with reported immunologic activity in combination with cyclophosphamide. This Phase 2, randomized, open-label study compared tucotuzumab/cyclophosphamide, administered as maintenance, with best supportive care (BSC) in patients with extensive-disease small-cell lung cancer (ED-SCLC) who responded to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy with/without prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI). Patients received cyclophosphamide (300 mg/m, Day 1 of every 3-week cycle), followed by tucotuzumab (1.5 mg/m, Days 2-4) until disease progression. The primary endpoint was 6-month progression-free survival (PFS); the secondary objectives included overall survival (OS), treatment response, and safety. The 6-month PFS rate was lower in the tucotuzumab/cyclophosphamide group (n=64) than in the BSC group (n=44): 6.4 versus 12.2% [hazard ratio (HR): 0.98; 80% confidence interval (CI): 0.74-1.31]. HRs for PFS, time to progression, and OS indicated a similar risk of disease progression and death in both groups and best overall responses were generally comparable. For patients with previous PCI (n=26), there was a nonsignificant trend toward prolonged median PFS (1.7 vs. 1.5 months; HR: 0.60; 80% CI: 0.33-1.11) and OS (21.5 vs. 14.3 months; HR: 0.58; 80% CI: 0.31-1.05) in the tucotuzumab/cyclophosphamide group. Adverse events were more frequent with tucotuzumab/cyclophosphamide (92.2%) than with BSC (47.7%). Tucotuzumab/cyclophosphamide was well tolerated in ED-SCLC patients, but did not show PFS or OS benefits compared with BSC. The observed trend toward prolonged PFS and OS in the subgroup of patients receiving previous PCI may support further confirmation in a larger population.

Randomized phase II trial of Onartuzumab in combination with erlotinib in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: Increased hepatocyte growth factor/MET signaling is associated with poor prognosis and acquired resistance to epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) -targeted drugs in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We investigated whether dual inhibition of MET/EGFR results in clinical benefit in patients with NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with recurrent NSCLC were randomly assigned at a ratio of one to one to receive onartuzumab plus erlotinib or placebo plus erlotinib; crossover was allowed at progression. Tumor tissue was required to assess MET status by immunohistochemistry (IHC). Coprimary end points were progression-free survival (PFS) in the intent-to-treat (ITT) and MET-positive (MET IHC diagnostic positive) populations; additional end points included overall survival (OS), objective response rate, and safety. RESULTS: There was no improvement in PFS or OS in the ITT population (n = 137; PFS hazard ratio [HR], 1.09; P = .69; OS HR, 0.80; P = .34). MET-positive patients (n = 66) treated with erlotinib plus onartuzumab showed improvement in both PFS (HR, .53; P = .04) and OS (HR, .37; P = .002). Conversely, clinical outcomes were worse in MET-negative patients treated with onartuzumab plus erlotinib (n = 62; PFS HR, 1.82; P = .05; OS HR, 1.78; P = .16). MET-positive control patients had worse outcomes versus MET-negative control patients (n = 62; PFS HR, 1.71; P = .06; OS HR, 2.61; P = .004). Incidence of peripheral edema was increased in onartuzumab-treated patients. CONCLUSION: Onartuzumab plus erlotinib was associated with improved PFS and OS in the MET-positive population. These results combined with the worse outcomes observed in MET-negative patients treated with onartuzumab highlight the importance of diagnostic testing in drug development.

Randomized phase II study of palifermin for reducing dysphagia in patients receiving concurrent chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced unresectable non-small cell lung cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Dysphagia is a common, dose-limiting toxicity of combined chemoradiotherapy (CT/RT) in patients with locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This study assessed the efficacy and safety of palifermin in reducing dysphagia from CT/RT followed by consolidation chemotherapy (CT). METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, phase II trial enrolled adults with unresectable stage III NSCLC. Subjects received weekly paclitaxel (50 mg/m2) and carboplatin (AUC 2.0) with concurrent daily radiation (RT) of 6000 to 6600 cGy, followed by consolidation CT. Palifermin (n = 49) or placebo (n = 46) was administered before starting concurrent CT/RT and once weekly for 6 weeks. The primary end points were the incidence of grade ≥ 2 dysphagia and safety. RESULTS: The incidence of grade ≥ 2 and ≥ 3 dysphagia was numerically lower in palifermin subjects versus placebo subjects (61% versus 70%; p = 0.36; 22% versus 28%, p = 0.50, respectively). Mean duration of dysphagia (grade ≥ 2) was 25 days for palifermin subjects and 32 days for placebo subjects (p = 0.32). The incidence of adverse events was similar in the two treatment groups, and median overall survival and progression-free survival were not adversely affected by palifermin treatment (overall survival: 513 versus 319 days; progression-free survival: 262 versus 235 days for palifermin versus placebo arms, respectively). The palifermin arm received more doses of CT per study design and significantly more patients received RT doses ≥ 6000 cGy (84% versus 61%, p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this exploratory trial suggest that additional larger studies may be warranted to further evaluate the effect of palifermin on dysphagia, exposure to CT/RT, and long-term survival.