Search

Background: At an interim analysis (median follow-up, 6.2 months; n = 187), the phase 3 COSMIC-311 trial met the primary end point of progression-free survival (PFS): cabozantinib improved PFS versus a placebo (median, not reached vs. 1.9 months; p < .0001) in patients with previously treated radioiodine-refractory differentiated thyroid cancer (RAIR-DTC). The results from an exploratory analysis using an extended datacut are presented., Methods: Patients 16 years old or older with RAIR-DTC who progressed on prior lenvatinib and/or sorafenib were randomized 2:1 to oral cabozantinib tablets (60 mg/day) or a placebo. Placebo patients could cross over to open-label cabozantinib upon radiographic disease progression. The objective response rate (ORR) in the first 100 randomized patients and the PFS in the intent-to-treat population, both according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 by blinded, independent review, were the primary end points., Results: At the data cutoff (February 8, 2021), 258 patients had been randomized (cabozantinib, n = 170; placebo, n = 88); the median follow-up was 10.1 months. The median PFS was 11.0 months (96% confidence interval [CI], 7.4-13.8 months) for cabozantinib and 1.9 months (96% CI, 1.9-3.7 months) for the placebo (hazard ratio, 0.22; 96% CI, 0.15-0.32; p < .0001). The ORR was 11.0% (95% CI, 6.9%-16.9%) versus 0% (95% CI, 0.0%-4.1%) (p = .0003) with one complete response with cabozantinib. Forty placebo patients crossed over to open-label cabozantinib. Grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 62% and 28% of the cabozantinib- and placebo-treated patients, respectively; the most common were hypertension (12% vs. 2%), palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (10% vs. 0%), and fatigue (9% vs. 0%). There were no grade 5 treatment-related events., Conclusions: At extended follow-up, cabozantinib maintained superior efficacy over a placebo in patients with previously treated RAIR-DTC with no new safety signals., (© 2022 The Authors. Cancer published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Cancer Society.)

Background: Although laryngectomy is the treatment of choice for patients with T4 larynx cancer, many patients are unable or unwilling to undergo laryngectomy and instead pursue larynx-preservation strategies combining radiotherapy (RT) and chemotherapy. Herein, the authors analyzed the National Cancer Data Base to evaluate overall survival (OS) between patients treated with surgical and organ-preserving modalities., Methods: The National Cancer Data Base was queried for patients diagnosed from 2004 through 2012 with T4M0 laryngeal cancer who underwent either laryngectomy (surgery) with adjuvant RT (SRT), chemotherapy starting concurrently within 7 days of RT (CCRT), or multiagent induction chemotherapy starting 43 to 98 days before RT (ICRT). Multivariate analysis and propensity score matching were used to explore the association between the intervention and OS. Recursive partitioning analysis was performed to identify groups benefiting from particular modalities., Results: A total of 1559 patients who underwent SRT, 1597 patients who underwent CCRT, and 386 patients who underwent ICRT were included. Adjusting for covariates, CCRT was found to be associated with inferior OS compared with SRT (hazard ratio [HR], 1.55; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.41-1.70 [P<.01]) and with ICRT (HR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.07-1.45 [P<.01]). OS among the patients treated with SRT did not appear to differ significantly from that of the ICRT cohort (HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.73-1.03 [P =  0.10]), a finding confirmed with propensity score matching. Recursive partitioning analysis identified no subset of patients that derived an OS benefit from either approach over the other., Conclusions: OS among patients undergoing SRT was found to be superior to that of patients treated with CCRT but did not significantly differ from that of those undergoing ICRT. Because these intriguing findings require validation, SRT should remain the standard of care for patients with this disease. However, organ preservation with ICRT may be a reasonable alternative in certain patients. Cancer 2017;123:600-608. © 2016 American Cancer Society., (© 2016 American Cancer Society.)

Background: The overall survival (OS) benefit of concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CRT) for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma patients older than 70 years is debated. This study examines the outcomes of elderly patients receiving CRT versus radiotherapy (RT) alone., Methods: The National Cancer Data Base was queried for patients older than 70 years with nonmetastatic oropharyngeal, laryngeal, or hypopharyngeal cancer (T3-4 or N(+)). CRT was defined as chemotherapy started within 14 days of the initiation of RT. Univariate analysis, multivariate analysis (MVA), propensity score matching (PSM), and recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) were performed., Results: The study included 4042 patients: 2538 (63%) received CRT. The median follow-up was 19 months. The unadjusted median OS was longer with the addition of CRT (P < .001). OS was superior with CRT in the MVA (hazard ratio [HR], 0.63; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.58-0.68; P < .001) and PSM analyses (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.66-0.80; P < .001) in comparison with RT alone. According to RPA, CRT was associated with longer OS for patients 81 years or younger with low comorbidity scores and either T1-2/N2-3 disease or T3-4/N0-3 disease. The survival benefit with CRT disappeared for 2 subgroups in the 71- to 81-year age range: those with T1-2, N1, and Charlson-Deyo 0-1 (CD0-1) disease and those with T3-4, N1+, and CD1+ disease. Patients who were older than 81 years did not have increased survival with CRT. The receipt of CRT was associated with a longer duration of RT (odds ratio, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.50-2.01; P < .001)., Conclusions: Patients older than 70 years should not be denied concurrent chemotherapy solely on the basis of age; additional factors, including the performance status and the tumor stage, should be taken into account. Cancer 2016;122:1533-43. © 2016 American Cancer Society., (© 2016 American Cancer Society.)