Molecular basis and therapeutic targets in prostate cancer: A comprehensive review.

Prostate cancer is one of the most significant causes of morbidity and mortality in male patients. The incidence increases with age, and it is higher among African Americans. The occurrence of prostate cancer is associated with many risk factors, including genetic and hereditary predisposition. The most common genetic syndromes associated with prostate cancer risk are BRCA-associated hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) and Lynch syndrome. Local-regional therapy, i.e., surgery is beneficial in early-stage prostate cancer management. Advanced and metastatic prostate cancers require systemic therapies, including hormonal inhibition, chemotherapy, and targeted agents. Most prostate cancers can be treated by targeting the androgen-receptor pathway and decreasing androgen production or binding to androgen receptors (AR). Castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) usually involves the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway and requires targeted therapy. Specific molecular therapy can target mutated cell lines in which DNA defect repair is altered, caused by mutations of BRCA2, partner and localizer of BRCA2 (PALB2), and phosphatase and tensin homolog (PTEN) or the transmembrane protease serine 2-ERG (TMPRSS2-ERG) fusion. Most benefits were demonstrated in cyclin dependent-kinase 12 (CDK12) mutated cell lines when treated with anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (PD1) therapy. Therapies targeting p53 and AKT are the subject of ongoing clinical trials. Many genetic defects are listed as diagnostic, prognostic, and clinically actionable markers in prostate cancer. Androgen receptor splice variant 7 (AR-V7) is an important oncogenic driver and an early diagnostic and prognostic marker, as well as a therapeutic target in hormone-resistant CRPC. This review summarizes the pathophysiological mechanisms and available targeted therapies for prostate cancer.

Evaluating Alternative Ramucirumab Doses as a Single Agent or with Paclitaxel in Second-Line Treatment of Locally Advanced or Metastatic Gastric/Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma: Results from Two Randomized, Open-Label, Phase II Studies.

Studies JVDB and JVCZ examined alternative ramucirumab dosing regimens as monotherapy or combined with paclitaxel, respectively, in patients with advanced/metastatic gastric/gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma. For JVDB, randomized patients (N = 164) received ramucirumab monotherapy at four doses: 8 mg/kg every 2 weeks (Q2W) (registered dose), 12 mg/kg Q2W, 6 mg/kg weekly (QW), or 8 mg/kg on days 1 and 8 (D1D8) every 3 weeks (Q3W). The primary objectives were the safety and pharmacokinetics of ramucirumab monotherapy. For JVCZ, randomized patients (N = 245) received paclitaxel (80 mg/m2-D1D8D15) plus ramucirumab (8 mg/kg- or 12 mg/kg-Q2W). The primary objective was progression-free survival (PFS) of 12 mg/kg-Q2W arm versus placebo from RAINBOW using meta-analysis. Relative to the registered dose, exploratory dosing regimens (EDRs) led to higher ramucirumab serum concentrations in both studies. EDR safety profiles were consistent with previous studies. In JVDB, serious adverse events occurred more frequently in the 8 mg/kg-D1D8-Q3W arm versus the registered dose; 6 mg/kg-QW EDR had a higher incidence of bleeding/hemorrhage. In JVCZ, PFS was improved with the 12 mg/kg plus paclitaxel combination versus placebo in RAINBOW; however, no significant PFS improvement was observed between the 12 mg/kg and 8 mg/kg arms. The lack of a dose/exposure-response relationship in these studies supports the standard dose of ramucirumab 8 mg/kg-Q2W as monotherapy or in combination with paclitaxel as second-line treatment for advanced/metastatic gastric/GEJ adenocarcinoma.

Final Analysis of Outcomes and RAS/BRAF Status in a Randomized Phase 3 Study of Panitumumab and Best Supportive Care in Chemorefractory Wild Type KRAS Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Tumor rat sarcoma gene (RAS) status is a negative predictive biomarker for anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We analyzed outcomes according to RAS and v-Raf murine sarcoma viral oncogene homolog B (BRAF) mutational status, and evaluated early tumor shrinkage (ETS) and depth of response (DpR) for patients with wild type RAS. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with confirmed metastatic colon or rectum adenocarcinoma, wild type Kristen rat sarcoma gene tumor exon 2 status, clinical/radiologic disease progression or toxicity during irinotecan or oxaliplatin treatment, and no previous anti-EGFR therapy were randomized 1:1 to receive best supportive care (BSC) with or without panitumumab (6.0 mg/kg, intravenously, on day 1 of each 14-day cycle) in this open-label, multicenter, phase III study (20100007). RAS and BRAF mutation status were determined using Sanger sequencing. ETS was evaluated as maximum percentage change from baseline to week 8; DpR was calculated as the percentage change for tumor shrinkage at nadir versus baseline. RESULTS: Overall, 270 patients had RAS wild type mCRC (panitumumab with BSC, n = 142; BSC, n = 128). For patients with wild type RAS tumors, median overall survival (OS; hazard ratio [HR], 0.72; P = .015) and progression-free survival (PFS; HR, 0.45; P < .0001) were improved with panitumumab with BSC versus BSC. Similar improvements were seen for patients with wild type RAS, and wild type BRAF tumors (OS: HR, 0.75; P = .04; PFS: HR, 0.45; P < .0001). Median DpR was 16.9% for the evaluable panitumumab with BSC wild type RAS population. Overall, 69.5% experienced any type of tumor shrinkage at week 8; 38.2% experienced ≥ 20% shrinkage. Similar improvements in OS and PFS were seen with stratification according to ETS. CONCLUSION: This analysis showed that panitumumab improved outcomes in wild type RAS mCRC and indicated that ETS and DpR could be used as additional efficacy markers.

Rilotumumab plus epirubicin, cisplatin, and capecitabine as first-line therapy in advanced MET-positive gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction cancer (RILOMET-1): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Rilotumumab is a fully human monoclonal antibody that selectively targets the ligand of the MET receptor, hepatocyte growth factor (HGF). We aimed to assess the efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics of rilotumumab combined with epirubicin, cisplatin, and capecitabine, and to assess potential biomarkers, in patients with advanced MET-positive gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma. METHODS: This multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study was done at 152 centres in 27 countries. We recruited adults (aged ≥18 years) with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1, MET-positive tumours (≥25% of tumour cells with membrane staining of ≥1+ staining intensity), and evaluable disease, who had not received previous systemic therapy. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via a computerised voice response system to receive rilotumumab 15 mg/kg intravenously or placebo in combination with open-label chemotherapy (epirubicin 50 mg/m2 intravenously; cisplatin 60 mg/m2 intravenously; capecitabine 625 mg/m2 orally twice daily) in 21-day cycles for up to ten cycles. After completion of chemotherapy, patients continued to receive rilotumumab or placebo monotherapy until disease progression, intolerability, withdrawal of consent, or study termination. Randomisation was stratified by disease extent and ECOG performance status. Both patients and physicians were masked to study treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was overall survival, analysed by intention to treat. We report the final analysis. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01697072. FINDINGS: Between Nov 7, 2012, and Nov 21, 2014, 609 patients were randomly assigned to rilotumumab plus epirubicin, cisplatin, and capecitabine (rilotumumab group; n=304) or placebo plus epirubicin, cisplatin, and capecitabine (placebo group; n=305). Study treatment was stopped early after an independent data monitoring committee found a higher number of deaths in the rilotumumab group than in the placebo group; all patients in the rilotumumab group subsequently discontinued all study treatment. Median follow-up was 7·7 months (IQR 3·6-12·0) for patients in the rilotumumab group and 9·4 months (5·3-13·1) for patients in the placebo group. Median overall survival was 8·8 months (95% CI 7·7-10·2) in the rilotumumab group compared with 10·7 months (9·6-12·4) in the placebo group (stratified hazard ratio 1·34, 95% CI 1·10-1·63; p=0·003). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events in the rilotumumab and placebo groups were neutropenia (86 [29%] of 298 patients vs 97 [32%] of 299 patients), anaemia (37 [12%] vs 43 [14%]), and fatigue (30 [10%] vs 35 [12%]). The frequency of serious adverse events was similar in the rilotumumab and placebo groups (142 [48%] vs 149 [50%]). More deaths due to adverse events occurred in the rilotumumab group than the placebo group (42 [14%] vs 31 [10%]). In the rilotumumab group, 33 (11%) of 298 patients had fatal adverse events due to disease progression, and nine (3%) had fatal events not due to disease progression. In the placebo group, 23 (8%) of 299 patients had fatal adverse events due to disease progression, and eight (3%) had fatal events not due to disease progression. INTERPRETATION: Ligand-blocking inhibition of the MET pathway with rilotumumab is not effective in improving clinical outcomes in patients with MET-positive gastric or gastro-oesophageal adenocarcinoma. FUNDING: Amgen.

Randomized Phase II Study of Duligotuzumab (MEHD7945A) vs. Cetuximab in Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck (MEHGAN Study).

BACKGROUND: Duligotuzumab, a novel dual-action humanized IgG1 antibody that blocks ligand binding to epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 3 (HER3), inhibits signaling from all ligand-dependent HER dimers, and can elicit antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity. High tumor-expression of neuregulin 1 (NRG1), a ligand to HER3, may enhance sensitivity to duligotuzumab. METHODS: This multicenter, open-label, randomized phase II study (MEHGAN) evaluated drug efficacy in patients with recurrent/metastatic (R/M) squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) progressive on/after chemotherapy and among patients with NRG1-high tumors. Patients received duligotuzumab (1100 mg IV, q2w) or cetuximab (400 mg/m2 load, 250 mg/m2 IV, q1w) until progression or intolerable toxicity. Tumor samples were assayed for biomarkers [NRG1, ERBB3, and human papillomavirus (HPV) status]. RESULTS: Patients (N = 121) were randomized (duligotuzumab:cetuximab; 59:62), median age 62 years; ECOG 0-2. Both arms (duligotuzumab vs. cetuximab, respectively) showed comparable progression-free survival [4.2 vs. 4.0 months; HR: 1.23 (90% confidence interval (CI): 0.89-1.70)], overall survival [7.2 vs. 8.7 months; HR 1.15 (90% CI: 0.81-1.63)], and objective response rate (12 vs. 14.5%), with no difference between patients with NRG1-high tumors or ERBB3-low tumors. Responses in both arms were confined to HPV-negative patients. Grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) (duligotuzumab vs. cetuximab, respectively) included infections (22 vs. 11.5%) and GI disorders (17 vs. 7%), contributing to higher rates of serious AEs (41 vs. 29.5%). Metabolic disorders were less frequent with duligotuzumab (10 vs. 16%); any grade rash-related events were less with duligotuzumab (49 vs. 67%). CONCLUSION: While several lines of preclinical evidence had supported the premise that the blockade of HER3 in addition to that of EGFR may improve outcomes for patients with R/M SCCHN overall or specifically in those patients whose tumors express high levels of NRG1, this study provided definitive clinical evidence refuting this hypothesis. Duligotuzumab did not improve patient outcomes in comparison to cetuximab despite frequent expression of NRG1. These data indicate that inhibition of EGFR alone is sufficient to block EGFR-HER3 signaling, suggesting that HER2 plays a minimal role in this disease. Extensive biomarker analyses further show that HPV-negative SCCHN but not HPV-positive SCCHN are most likely to respond to EGFR blockage by cetuximab or duligotuzumab.

A phase 3 trial evaluating panitumumab plus best supportive care vs best supportive care in chemorefractory wild-type KRAS or RAS metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: We assessed the treatment effect of panitumumab plus best supportive care (BSC) vs BSC on overall survival (OS) in patients with chemorefractory wild-type KRAS exon 2 metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) and report the first prospective extended RAS analysis in a phase 3 trial. METHODS: Patients with wild-type KRAS exon 2 mCRC were randomised 1 : 1 to panitumumab (6 mg kg-1 Q2W) plus BSC or BSC. On-study crossover was prohibited. RAS mutation status was determined by central laboratory testing. The primary endpoint was OS in wild-type KRAS exon 2 mCRC; OS in wild-type RAS mCRC (KRAS and NRAS exons 2, 3, and 4) was a secondary endpoint. RESULTS: Three hundred seventy seven patients with wild-type KRAS exon 2 mCRC were randomised. Median OS was 10.0 months with panitumumab plus BSC vs 7.4 months with BSC (HR=0.73; 95% CI=0.57-0.93; P=0.0096). RAS ascertainment was 86%. In wild-type RAS mCRC, median OS for panitumumab plus BSC was 10.0 vs 6.9 months for BSC (HR=0.70; 95% CI=0.53-0.93; P=0.0135). Patients with RAS mutations did not benefit from panitumumab (OS HR=0.99; 95% CI=0.49-2.00). No new safety signals were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Panitumumab significantly improved OS in wild-type KRAS exon 2 mCRC. The effect was more pronounced in wild-type RAS mCRC, validating previous retrospective analyses.

Biomarker analyses in REGARD gastric/GEJ carcinoma patients treated with VEGFR2-targeted antibody ramucirumab.

BACKGROUND: Angiogenesis inhibition is an important strategy for cancer treatment. Ramucirumab, a human IgG1 monoclonal antibody that targets VEGF receptor 2 (VEGFR2), inhibits VEGF-A, -C, -D binding and endothelial cell proliferation. To attempt to identify prognostic and predictive biomarkers, retrospective analyses were used to assess tumour (HER2, VEGFR2) and serum (VEGF-C and -D, and soluble (s) VEGFR1 and 3) biomarkers in phase 3 REGARD patients with metastatic gastric/gastroesophageal junction carcinoma. METHODS: A total of 152 out of 355 (43%) patients randomised to ramucirumab or placebo had ⩾1 evaluable biomarker result using VEGFR2 immunohistochemistry or HER2, immunohistochemistry or FISH, of blinded baseline tumour tissue samples. Serum samples (32 patients, 9%) were assayed for VEGF-C and -D, and sVEGFR1 and 3. RESULTS: None of the biomarkers tested were associated with ramucirumab efficacy at a level of statistical significance. High VEGFR2 endothelial expression was associated with a non-significant prognostic trend toward shorter progression-free survival (high vs low HR=1.65, 95% CI=0.84,3.23). Treatment with ramucirumab was associated with a trend toward improved survival in both high (HR=0.69, 95% CI=0.38, 1.22) and low (HR=0.73, 95% CI=0.42, 1.26) VEGFR2 subgroups. The benefit associated with ramucirumab did not appear to differ by tumoural HER2 expression. CONCLUSIONS: REGARD exploratory analyses did not identify a strong potentially predictive biomarker of ramucirumab efficacy; however, statistical power was limited.