Search

Purpose: A proper estimation of the magnitude of the overall survival (OS) benefit from infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan (FOLFOXIRI) plus bevacizumab versus doublets + bevacizumab is lacking because all trials that have investigated this regimen had primary end points other than OS. To test OS with higher power and to explore the interaction of treatment effect with main patient and disease characteristics, we performed an individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis., Patients and Methods: IPD from 5 eligible trials were collected: CHARTA (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01321957), OLIVIA (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00778102), STEAM (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01765582), TRIBE (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00719797), and TRIBE2 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02339116). The primary end point was OS. Secondary end points were progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), R0 resection rate, grade 3/4 adverse events, and subgroup analyses according to clinical and molecular characteristics., Results: A total of 1,697 patients were randomly assigned to FOLFOXIRI + bevacizumab (n = 846) or doublets + bevacizumab (n = 851). Most (78%) had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0, and the median age was 61 years. After a median follow-up of 39.9 months, patients assigned to FOLFOXIRI + bevacizumab had significantly longer OS than those assigned to doublets + bevacizumab (median, 28.9 v 24.5 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.81; 95% CI, 0.72 to 0.91; P < .001), with no significant heterogeneity among trials ( P = .39; I 2 = 2%). No significant interaction effect between treatment arm and investigated characteristics was demonstrated. Patients assigned to FOLFOXIRI + bevacizumab had longer PFS (median, 12.2 v 9.9 months; HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.82; P < .001), higher ORR (64.5% v 53.6%; P < .001), higher R0 resection rate (16.4% v 11.8%; P = .007), and higher rates of grade 3/4 neutropenia (45.8% v 21.5%; P < .001), febrile neutropenia (6.3% v 3.7%; P = .019), and diarrhea (17.8% v 8.4%; P < .001)., Conclusion: FOLFOXIRI + bevacizumab significantly and meaningfully improves survival of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer compared with doublets + bevacizumab and provides advantage in PFS, ORR, and R0 resection rate at the price of a moderate increase in toxicity. No increased benefit is observed among patients with BRAF -mutant tumors.

Purpose Detection of specific molecular alterations in tumors guides the selection of effective targeted treatment of patients with several types of cancer. These molecular alterations may occur in other tumor types for which the efficacy of targeted therapy remains unclear. The MyPathway study evaluates the efficacy and safety of selected targeted therapies in tumor types that harbor relevant genetic alterations but are outside of current labeling for these treatments. Methods MyPathway ( ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02091141) is a multicenter, nonrandomized, phase IIa multiple basket study. Patients with advanced refractory solid tumors harboring molecular alterations in human epidermal growth factor receptor-2, epidermal growth factor receptor, v-raf murine sarcoma viral oncogene homolog B1, or the Hedgehog pathway are treated with pertuzumab plus trastuzumab, erlotinib, vemurafenib, or vismodegib, respectively. The primary end point is investigator-assessed objective response rate within each tumor-pathway cohort. Results Between April 1, 2014 and November 1, 2016, 251 patients with 35 different tumor types received study treatment. The efficacy population contains 230 treated patients who were evaluated for response or discontinued treatment before evaluation. Fifty-two patients (23%) with 14 different tumor types had objective responses (complete, n = 4; partial, n = 48). Tumor-pathway cohorts with notable objective response rates included human epidermal growth factor receptor-2-amplified/overexpressing colorectal (38% [14 of 37]; 95% CI, 23% to 55%) and v-raf murine sarcoma viral oncogene homolog B1 V600-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer (43% [six of 14]; 95% CI, 18% to 71%). Conclusion The four currently approved targeted therapy regimens in the MyPathway study produced meaningful responses when administered without chemotherapy in several refractory solid tumor types not currently labeled for these agents.

Purpose Factors contributing to early mortality after initiation of treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer are poorly understood. Materials and Methods Data from 22,654 patients enrolled in 28 randomized phase III trials contained in the ARCAD (Aide et Recherche en Cancérologie Digestive) database were pooled. Multivariable logistic regression models for 30-, 60-, and 90-day mortality were constructed, including clinically and statistically significant patient and disease factors and interaction terms. A calculator (nomogram) for 90-day mortality was developed and validated internally using bootstrapping methods and externally using a 10% random holdout sample from each trial. The impact of early progression on the likelihood of survival to 90 days was examined with time-dependent Cox proportional hazards models. Results Mortality rates were 1.4% at 30 days, 3.4% at 60 days, and 5.5% at 90 days. Among baseline factors, advanced age, lower body mass index, poorer performance status, increased number of metastatic sites, BRAF mutant status, and several laboratory parameters were associated with increased likelihood of early mortality. A multivariable model for 90-day mortality showed strong internal discrimination (C-index, 0.77) and good calibration across risk groups as well as accurate predictions in the external validation set, both overall and within patient subgroups. Conclusion A validated clinical nomogram has been developed to quantify the risk of early death for individual patients during initial treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. This tool may be used for patient eligibility assessment or risk stratification in future clinical trials and to identify patients requiring more or less aggressive therapy and additional supportive measures during and after treatment.

Purpose: In recent retrospective analyses of early-stage colorectal cancer (CRC), low and high body mass index (BMI) scores were associated with worsened outcomes. Whether BMI is a prognostic or predictive factor in metastatic CRC (mCRC) is unclear., Patients and Methods: Individual data from 21,149 patients enrolled onto 25 first-line mCRC trials during 1997 to 2012 were pooled. We assessed both prognostic and predictive effects of BMI on overall survival and progression-free survival, and we accounted for patient and tumor characteristics and therapy type (targeted v nontargeted)., Results: BMI was prognostic for overall survival (P < .001) and progression-free survival (P < .001), with an L-shaped pattern. That is, risk of progression and/or death was greatest for low BMI; risk decreased as BMI increased to approximately 28 kg/m(2), and then it plateaued. Relative to obese patients, patients with a BMI of 18.5 kg/m(2) had a 27% increased risk of having a PFS event (95% CI, 20% to 34%) and a 50% increased risk of death (95% CI, 43% to 56%). Low BMI was associated with poorer survival for men than women (interaction P < .001). BMI was not predictive of treatment effect., Conclusion: Low BMI is associated with an increased risk of progression and death among the patients enrolled on the mCRC trials, with no increased risk for elevated BMI, in contrast to the adjuvant setting. Possible explanations include negative effects related to cancer cachexia in patients with low BMI, increased drug delivery or selection bias in patients with high BMI, and potential for an interaction between BMI and molecular signaling pathways., Competing Interests: Authors' disclosures of potential conflicts of interest are found in the article online at www.jco.org. Author contributions are found at the end of this article., (© 2015 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Purpose: Patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma have a poor prognosis and limited second-line treatment options. Evidence suggests a role for the Janus kinase (JAK)/signal transducer and activator of transcription pathway in the pathogenesis and clinical course of pancreatic cancer., Patients and Methods: In this double-blind, phase II study, patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer who had experienced treatment failure with gemcitabine were randomly assigned 1:1 to the JAK1/JAK2 inhibitor ruxolitinib (15 mg twice daily) plus capecitabine (1,000 mg/m(2) twice daily) or placebo plus capecitabine. The primary end point was overall survival (OS); secondary end points included progression-free survival, clinical benefit response, objective response rate, and safety. Prespecified subgroup analyses evaluated treatment heterogeneity and efficacy in patients with evidence of inflammation., Results: In the intent-to-treat population (ruxolitinib, n = 64; placebo, n = 63), the hazard ratio was 0.79 (95% CI, 0.53 to 1.18; P = .25) for OS and was 0.75 (95% CI, 0.52 to 1.10; P = .14) for progression-free survival. In a prespecified subgroup analysis of patients with inflammation, defined by serum C-reactive protein levels greater than the study population median (ie, 13 mg/L), OS was significantly greater with ruxolitinib than with placebo (hazard ratio, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.26 to 0.85; P = .011). Prolonged survival in this subgroup was supported by post hoc analyses of OS that categorized patients by the modified Glasgow Prognostic Score, a systemic inflammation-based prognostic system. Grade 3 or greater adverse events were observed with similar frequency in the ruxolitinib (74.6%) and placebo (81.7%) groups. Grade 3 or greater anemia was more frequent with ruxolitinib (15.3%; placebo, 1.7%)., Conclusion: Ruxolitinib plus capecitabine was generally well tolerated and may improve survival in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer and evidence of systemic inflammation., Competing Interests: Authors' disclosures of potential conflicts of interest are found in the article online at www.jco.org. Author contributions are found at the end of this article., (© 2015 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Purpose: Progression-free survival (PFS) has previously been established as a surrogate for overall survival (OS) for first-line metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Because mCRC treatment has advanced in the last decade with extended OS, this surrogacy requires re-examination., Methods: Individual patient data from 16,762 patients were available from 22 first-line mCRC studies conducted from 1997 to 2006; 12 of those studies tested antiangiogenic and/or anti-epidermal growth factor receptor agents. The relationship between PFS (first event of progression or death) and OS was evaluated by using R(2) statistics (the closer the value is to 1, the stronger the correlation) from weighted least squares regression of trial-specific hazard ratios estimated by using Cox and Copula models., Results: Forty-four percent of patients received a regimen that included biologic agents. Median first-line PFS was 8.3 months, and median OS was 18.2 months. The correlation between PFS and OS was modest (R(2), 0.45 to 0.69). Analyses limited to trials that tested treatments with biologic agents, nonstrategy trials, or superiority trials did not improve surrogacy., Conclusion: In modern mCRC trials, in which survival after the first progression exceeds time to first progression, a positive but modest correlation was observed between OS and PFS at both the patient and trial levels. This finding demonstrates the substantial variability in OS introduced by the number of lines of therapy and types of effective subsequent treatments and the associated challenge to the use of OS as an end point to assess the benefit attributable to a single line of therapy. PFS remains an appropriate primary end point for first-line mCRC trials to detect the direct treatment effect of new agents., (© 2014 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Purpose: To determine whether patients' expectations of benefit in early-phase oncology trials depend on how patients are queried and to explore whether expectations are associated with patient characteristics., Patients and Methods: Participants were 171 patients in phase I or II oncology trials in the United States. After providing informed consent for a trial but before receiving the investigational therapy, participants answered questions about expectations of benefit. We randomly assigned participants to one of three groups corresponding to three queries about expectations: frequency type, belief type, or both. Main outcomes were differences in expectations by question type and the extent to which expectations were associated with demographic characteristics, numeracy, dispositional optimism, religiousness/spirituality, understanding of research, and other measures., Results: The belief-type group had a higher mean expectation of benefit (64.4 of 100) than the combination group (51.6; P = .01) and the frequency-type group (43.1; P < .001). Mean expectations in the combination and frequency groups were not significantly different (P = .06). Belief-type expectations were associated with a preference for nonquantitative information (r = -0.19; 95% CI, -0.19 to -0.36), knowledge about research (r = -0.21; 95% CI, -0.38 to -0.03), dispositional optimism (r = 0.20; 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.37), and spirituality (r = 0.22; 95% CI, 0.03 to 0.38). Frequency-type expectations were associated with knowledge about clinical research (r = -0.27; 95% CI, -0.27 to -0.51)., Conclusion: In early-phase oncology trials, patients' reported expectations of benefit differed according to how patients were queried and were associated with patient characteristics. These findings have implications for how informed consent is obtained and assessed.

Purpose: Thromboembolism is a major source of morbidity and mortality in patients with cancer. The contribution of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy to these events remains controversial., Patients and Methods: Individual patient data were available for 6,055 patients in 10 randomized studies. Unadjusted and exposure-adjusted incidence of venous thromboembolisms (VTEs) was estimated for the overall population and by tumor type. Multivariate analysis was performed to identify risk factors for development of VTE. The safety of anticoagulant therapy in patients undergoing bevacizumab treatment was also examined., Results: There were no statistically significant increases in the unadjusted or exposure-adjusted incidences of all-grade VTEs for bevacizumab versus controls in the overall population or by tumor type. The unadjusted incidence in the overall population was 10.9% with bevacizumab versus 9.8% with controls (odds ratio, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.96 to 1.35; P = .13); the rate per 100 patient-years was 18.5 for bevacizumab and 20.3 for controls (rate ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.77 to 1.06; P =.23). Incidences of grade 3 to 5 events were similar in both groups. Several risk factors for VTEs were identified, including tumor type, older age, poorer performance status, VTE history, and baseline oral anticoagulant use. No interactions between bevacizumab treatment and these factors were observed. For patients who had a VTE and received full-dose anticoagulation therapy, the risk of severe bleeding was low (< 1%) and unaffected by bevacizumab treatment., Conclusion: The addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy did not statistically significantly increase the risk of VTEs versus chemotherapy alone. The risk for VTEs is driven predominantly by tumor and host factors.

Purpose: Preclinical studies have suggested accelerated tumor growth, local invasion, and distant metastasis after withdrawal of treatment with some antiangiogenic agents. To investigate whether discontinuation of bevacizumab treatment is associated with accelerated disease progression or increased mortality, we retrospectively analyzed five randomized, placebo-controlled phase III studies in 4,205 patients with breast, colorectal, renal, and pancreatic cancer., Methods: Time from treatment discontinuation to progressive disease or death was analyzed in patients discontinuing bevacizumab/placebo as a result of adverse events (AEs). Mortality rates were assessed at 30, 60, 90, 120, 150, 180, and 210 days after the last bevacizumab/placebo dose in the following two groups: patients discontinuing bevacizumab/placebo as a result of AEs and patients discontinuing bevacizumab/placebo for any reason. In the same groups, time from treatment discontinuation to death was analyzed. Data on disease progression pattern were available and analyzed in four of the five studies., Results: In the pooled analysis, median time from discontinuation as a result of AEs to progression/death was 3.0 months (95% CI, 2.6 to 3.8 months) for placebo and 4.0 months (95% CI, 3.4 to 4.6 months) for bevacizumab (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.10). Mortality rates from 30 days to 210 days after treatment discontinuation and time from discontinuation to death were similar in bevacizumab- and placebo-treated patients. In addition, similar patterns of disease progression were seen in bevacizumab- and placebo-treated patients., Conclusion: This retrospective analysis of five placebo-controlled clinical trials does not support a decreased time to disease progression, increased mortality, or altered disease progression pattern after cessation of bevacizumab therapy.

Purpose: The combination of gemcitabine plus bevacizumab produced a 21% response rate and a median survival of 8.8 months in a multicenter phase II trial in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. These encouraging data led Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) to conduct a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized phase III trial of gemcitabine/bevacizumab versus gemcitabine/placebo in advanced pancreatic cancer patients., Patients and Methods: Eligible patients had no prior therapy for advanced disease, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0 to 2, no tumor invasion of adjacent organs, and no increased bleeding risk. The primary end point was overall survival. Patients were stratified by performance status, extent of disease, and prior radiotherapy. Patients received gemcitabine at 1,000 mg/m(2) over 30 minutes on days 1, 8, and 15 every 28 days and bevacizumab at 10 mg/kg or placebo on days 1 and 15 every 28 days., Results: Between June 2004 and April 2006, 602 patients were enrolled onto the study and 535 were treated. Median overall survival was 5.8 months for gemcitabine/bevacizumab and 5.9 months for gemcitabine/placebo (P = .95). Median progression-free survival was 3.8 and 2.9 months, respectively (P = .07). Overall response rates were 13% and 10%, respectively. Patients with a performance status of 0, 1, and 2 survived a median of 7.9, 4.8, and 2.4 months, respectively. The only statistically significant differences in grades 3 and 4 toxicity occurred for hypertension (10% v 3%; P < .001) and proteinuria (5% v 1%; P = .002); venous thrombosis grade > or = 3 was equivalent in both arms (14% and 15%, respectively)., Conclusion: The addition of bevacizumab to gemcitabine does not improve survival in advanced pancreatic cancer patients.

Purpose: Colorectal cancer (CRC) occurs predominantly in older persons. To provide more statistical power to assess risk/benefit in older patients, we examined the clinical benefit of bevacizumab (BV) plus fluorouracil-based chemotherapy in first-line metastatic CRC (mCRC) treatment in patients aged > or = 65 years, using data pooled from two placebo-controlled studies., Patients and Methods: Pooled efficacy data for 439 patients > or = 65 years old randomized to BV plus chemotherapy (n = 218) or placebo plus chemotherapy (n = 221) in study 1 and study 2 were retrospectively analyzed on an intent-to-treat basis for overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and objective response. Safety analysis was based on reports of targeted adverse events in treated patients., Results: Median OS with BV plus chemotherapy was 19.3 v 14.3 months with placebo plus chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.70; 95% CI, 0.55 to 0.90; P = .006). Patients treated with BV plus chemotherapy had a median PFS of 9.2 v 6.2 months for placebo plus chemotherapy patients (HR = 0.52; 95% CI, 0.40 to 0.67; P < .0001). The objective response rate was 34.4% with BV plus chemotherapy versus 29.0% with placebo plus chemotherapy (difference not statistically significant). Rates of BV-associated adverse events in the pooled BV plus chemotherapy group were consistent with those reported in the overall populations for the two studies., Conclusion: Analysis of pooled patient cohorts age >/= 65 years from two similar trials in mCRC indicates that adding bevacizumab to fluorouracil-based chemotherapy improved OS and PFS, similar to the benefits in younger patients. Also, the risks of treatment do not seem to exceed those in younger patients with mCRC.

Purpose: In the phase III study AVF2107g, bevacizumab (BV) demonstrated a survival benefit when added to irinotecan, fluorouracil, and leucovorin (IFL) in first-line metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). In a parallel phase III study, Intergroup N9741, oxaliplatin plus fluorouracil and leucovorin (FOLFOX) also demonstrated a survival benefit compared with IFL. As these two superior therapies have differing mechanisms of action, we explored whether the improved survival associated with the superior therapy was dependent on tumor response., Patients and Methods: For these retrospective, exploratory analyses, patients were defined as responders or nonresponders by whether complete or partial response was achieved with first-line therapy., Results: Compared with IFL alone, BV plus IFL and FOLFOX each demonstrated statistically significant improvements in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) regardless of objective tumor response. BV-treated nonresponders had a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.63 (P = .0001) for PFS and 0.76 (P = .0188) for OS compared with IFL-treated nonresponders. FOLFOX-treated nonresponders had an HR of 0.75 (P = .0029) for PFS and 0.74 (P = .0030) for OS compared with IFL-treated nonresponders., Conclusion: In both AVF2107g and N9741, objective response did not predict the magnitude of PFS or OS benefit from the superior therapy; nonresponders, despite a poorer prognosis than responders, achieved extended PFS and OS from BV plus IFL or FOLFOX compared with IFL. On the basis of these data, tumor response in metastatic colorectal cancer is not a necessary factor for a therapy to provide benefit to an individual patient.

Purpose: Sunitinib is an oral, multitargeted receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor of the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor and multiple other growth factor receptors. We assessed the safety and efficacy of sunitinib in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer after failure of standard therapy., Patients and Methods: Eighty-four patients were enrolled onto this two-stage phase II trial and were stratified by whether they had received prior bevacizumab (n = 43) or not (n = 41). Treatment comprised sunitinib 50 mg orally daily for 4 weeks, followed by 2 weeks off treatment, in repeated 6-week cycles., Results: By Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors criteria, one patient, who was in the prior bevacizumab cohort, achieved a partial response, and 13 patients (two in the prior bevacizumab cohort and 11 in the no prior bevacizumab cohort) achieved stable disease lasting > or = 22 weeks. Median time to progression in the prior bevacizumab and bevacizumab-naïve cohorts was 2.2 months (95% CI, 1.9 to 2.3 months) and 2.5 months (95% CI, 2.3 to 3.1 months), respectively, whereas median overall survival time was 7.1 months (95% CI, 4.9 to 10.6 months) and 10.2 months (95% CI, 8.2 to 15.3 months), respectively. The most common adverse events were fatigue, diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, and anorexia. Twenty-six patients (32%) required dose reduction to 37.5 mg/d, and one patient required dose reduction to 25 mg/d., Conclusion: Sunitinib did not demonstrate a meaningful single-agent objective response rate in colorectal cancer refractory to standard chemotherapy. However, the mechanisms of action and acceptable safety profile of sunitinib warrant further study in combination with standard regimens for metastatic colorectal cancer.

Purpose: Exatecan mesylate is a hexacyclic, water-soluble, topoisomerase-1 inhibitor. Exatecan has single-agent and combination activity with gemcitabine in advanced pancreatic cancer. A multicenter, randomized, phase III trial comparing exatecan plus gemcitabine versus gemcitabine alone in advanced pancreatic cancer was conducted., Patients and Methods: Eligibility criteria included Karnofsky performance status > or = 60%, locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma, and no prior chemotherapy. Radiation alone for locally advanced disease was permitted. Patients were randomly assigned on a 1:1 basis. For the exatecan plus gemcitabine arm, exatecan 2.0 mg/m2 and gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 were administered on days 1 and 8, every 3 weeks. Gemcitabine alone was dosed at 1,000 mg/m2 up to 7 weeks in the first cycle, then once a week for the first 3 weeks of a 4-week cycle. Tumor assessment was performed every 6 weeks. The primary end point was overall survival. An intent-to-treat analysis was used., Results: From August 2001 to January 2003, 349 patients were randomly assigned, 175 to exatecan plus gemcitabine and 174 to gemcitabine alone. Twenty-four patients (6.9%) were not treated. The median survival time was 6.7 months for exatecan plus gemcitabine and 6.2 months for gemcitabine alone (P = .52). One complete response (CR; < 1%) and 11 partial responses (PRs; 6.3%) were observed in the exatecan plus gemcitabine treatment group, and one CR (< 1%) and eight PRs (4.6%) were observed in the gemcitabine-alone group. Grade 3 and 4 toxicities were higher for the exatecan plus gemcitabine arm versus the gemcitabine alone arm; neutropenia (30% v 15%) and thrombocytopenia (15% v 4%)., Conclusion: Exatecan plus gemcitabine was not superior to gemcitabine alone with respect to overall survival in the first-line treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer.

Purpose: Overexpression of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) has been associated with aggressive tumor phenotypes, chemotherapy, and radiation resistance, as well as poor survival in preclinical and clinical models. The EGFR inhibitor gefitinib potentiates chemotherapy and radiation tumor cytotoxicity in preclinical models, including pancreatic and colorectal cancer. We initiated two phase I trials assessing the combination of gefitinib, capecitabine, and radiation in patients with localized pancreatic and rectal cancer., Patients and Methods: Patients with pathologically confirmed adenocarcinoma of the pancreas and rectum were eligible. Pretreatment staging included computed tomography, endoscopic ultrasound, and surgical evaluation. Patients received 50.4 Gy of external-beam radiation therapy to the tumor in 28 fractions. Capecitabine and gefitinib were administered throughout the radiation course. Following completion, patients were restaged and considered for resection. Primary end points included determination of dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) and a phase II dose; secondary end points included determination of non-DLTs and preliminary radiographic and pathologic response rates., Results: Ten patients were entered in the pancreatic study and six in the rectal study. DLT was seen in six of 10 patients in the pancreatic study and two of six patients in the rectal study. The primary DLT in both studies was diarrhea. Two patients developed arterial thrombi., Conclusion: The combination of gefitinib, capecitabine, and radiation in pancreatic and rectal cancer patients resulted in significant toxicity. A recommended phase II dose was not determined in either of our studies. Further investigation with this combination should be approached with caution.

Purpose: Bevacizumab is a monoclonal antibody to vascular endothelial growth factor-A (VEGF). In the pivotal trial in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), addition of bevacizumab to first-line irinotecan, fluorouracil, and leucovorin (IFL) significantly prolonged median survival. The aim of these retrospective subset analyses was to evaluate VEGF, thrombospondin-2 (THBS-2), and microvessel density (MVD) as prognostic factors and/or predictors of benefit from bevacizumab., Patients and Methods: In the pivotal trial, 813 patients with untreated mCRC were randomly assigned to receive IFL plus bevacizumab or placebo. Of 312 tissue samples collected (285 primaries, 27 metastases), outcome data were available for 278 (153 bevacizumab, 125 placebo). Epithelial and stromal VEGF expression were assessed by in situ hybridization (ISH) and immunohistochemistry on tissue microarrays and whole sections. Stromal THBS-2 expression was examined by ISH on tissue microarrays. MVD was quantified by Chalkley count. Overall survival was associated with these variables in retrospective subset analyses., Results: In all subgroups, estimated hazard ratios (HRs) for risk of death were < 1 for bevacizumab-treated patients regardless of the level of VEGF or THBS-2 expression or MVD. Patients with a high THBS-2 score showed a nonsignificant improvement in survival following bevacizumab treatment (HR = 0.11; 95% CI, 0.02 to 0.51) compared to patients with a low score (HR = 0.65; 95% CI, 0.41 to 1.02); interaction analysis P = .22. VEGF or THBS-2 expression and MVD were not significant prognostic factors., Conclusion: These exploratory analyses suggest that in patients with mCRC addition of bevacizumab to IFL improves survival regardless of the level of VEGF or THBS-2 expression, or MVD.

Purpose: This study (EGF10004) assessed the safety/tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and clinical activity of daily oral dosing with lapatinib (GW572016) in patients with ErbB1-expressing and/or ErbB2-overexpressing advanced-stage refractory solid tumors., Patients and Methods: Heavily pretreated patients with ErbB1-expressing and/or ErbB2-overexpressing metastatic cancers were randomly assigned to one of five dose cohorts of lapatinib administered once daily. Pharmacokinetic samples were obtained on days 1 and 20. Clinical response was assessed every 8 weeks., Results: Sixty-seven patients with metastatic solid tumors were treated with lapatinib. The most frequently reported drug-related adverse events were diarrhea (42%) and rash (31%). No grade 4 drug-related adverse events were reported. Five grade 3 drug-related toxicities (gastrointestinal events and rash) were experienced by four patients. Drug-related interstitial pneumonitis or cardiac dysfunction associated with other ErbB-targeted therapies was not reported. Four patients with trastuzumab-resistant metastatic breast cancer-two of whom were classified as having inflammatory breast cancer-had partial responses (PRs). Twenty-four patients with various other carcinomas experienced stable disease, of whom 10 received lapatinib for > or = 6 months. The relationships between lapatinib dose or serum concentration and clinical response could not be adequately characterized due to the limited response data. The incidence of diarrhea increased with increasing dose, whereas the incidence of rash was not related to dose., Conclusion: Lapatinib was well tolerated at doses ranging from 500 to 1,600 mg once daily. Clinical activity was observed in heavily pretreated patients with ErbB1-expressing and/or ErbB2-overexpressing metastatic cancers, including four PRs in patients with trastuzumab-resistant breast cancers and prolonged stable disease in 10 patients.

Purpose: Bevacizumab (Avastin; Genentech Inc, South San Francisco, CA), a recombinant, humanized anti-vascular endothelial growth factor monoclonal antibody that inhibits tumor angiogenesis, has demonstrated survival benefit in patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer when combined with irinotecan/fluorouracil (FU)/leucovorin (LV; IFL). Three randomized clinical studies have evaluated bevacizumab in combination with FU/LV alone. A combined analysis of raw data from these studies was performed to better assess the efficacy of bevacizumab with FU/LV., Patients and Methods: The analysis used primary efficacy data from three independent studies, including 241 patients in a combined control group receiving either FU/LV or IFL and 249 patients receiving FU/LV/bevacizumab (5 mg/kg once every 2 weeks). The efficacy data included response rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival., Results: The median duration of survival was 17.9 months in the FU/LV/bevacizumab group, compared with 14.6 months in the combined control group, corresponding to a hazard ratio for death of 0.74 (P = .008). The median duration of progression-free survival was 8.8 months in the FU/LV/bevacizumab group, compared with 5.6 months in the combined control group, corresponding to a hazard ratio for disease progression of 0.63 (P < or = .0001). The addition of bevacizumab also improved the response rate (34.1% v 24.5%; P = .019)., Conclusion: The addition of bevacizumab to FU/LV provides a statistically significant and clinically relevant benefit to patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer.

Purpose: In a phase III trial, combining bevacizumab (BV)--a recombinant, humanized, monoclonal antibody targeting vascular endothelial growth factor--with irinotecan, bolus fluorouracil (FU), and leucovorin (LV; IFL) increased survival compared with IFL alone in first-line treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). Results for the parent study of IFL/BV versus IFL/placebo are reported elsewhere. Here, we describe efficacy and safety results for the third patient cohort in this trial, who received BV combined with FU/LV, and compare them with results for concurrently enrolled patients who received IFL., Methods: Patients (N = 923) were randomly assigned to receive IFL/placebo (control), IFL/BV, or FU/LV/BV. Bevacizumab (Avastin; Genentech Inc, South San Francisco, CA) 5 mg/kg was administered intravenously every 2 weeks. Before an interim analysis confirmed acceptable safety for IFL/BV, 313 patients were concurrently randomly assigned to these three arms; after this analysis, the FU/LV/BV arm was discontinued., Results: Median overall survivals were 18.3 and 15.1 months with FU/LV/BV (n = 110) and IFL/placebo (n = 100), respectively. Median progression-free survivals were 8.8 and 6.8 months, respectively. Overall response rates were 40.0% and 37.0%, and median response durations were 8.5 and 7.2 months, respectively. Adverse events consistent with those expected from FU/leucovorin- or IFL-based regimens were seen, as were modest increases in hypertension and bleeding in the bevacizumab arm, which were generally easily managed., Conclusion: The FU/LV/BV regimen seems as effective as IFL and has an acceptable safety profile. FU/LV/BV is an active alternative treatment regimen for patients with previously untreated metastatic CRC.

Purpose: This was a pilot study to assess the biologic effects of lapatinib on various tumor growth/survival pathways in patients with advanced ErbB1 and/or ErbB2-overexpressing solid malignancies., Patients and Methods: Heavily pretreated patients with metastatic cancers overexpressing ErbB2 and/or expressing ErbB1 were randomly assigned to one of five dose cohorts of lapatinib (GW572016) administered orally once daily continuously. The biologic effects of lapatinib on tumor growth and survival pathways were assessed in tumor biopsies obtained before and after 21 days of therapy. Clinical response was determined at 8 weeks., Results: Sequential tumor biopsies from 33 patients were examined. Partial responses occurred in four patients with breast cancer, and disease stabilization occurred in 11 others with various malignancies. Responders exhibited variable levels of inhibition of p-ErbB1, p-ErbB2, p-Erk1/2, p-Akt, cyclin D1, and transforming growth factor alpha. Even some nonresponders demonstrated varying degrees of biomarker inhibition. Increased tumor cell apoptosis (TUNEL) occurred in patients with evidence of tumor regression but not in nonresponders (progressive disease). Clinical response was associated with a pretreatment TUNEL score > 0 and increased pretreatment expression of ErbB2, p-ErbB2, Erk1/2, p-Erk1/2, insulin-like growth factor receptor-1, p70 S6 kinase, and transforming growth factor alpha compared with nonresponders., Conclusion: Lapatinib exhibited preliminary evidence of biologic and clinical activity in ErbB1 and/or ErbB2-overexpressing tumors. However, the limited sample size of this study and the variability of the biologic endpoints suggest that further work is needed to prioritize biomarkers for disease-directed studies, and underscores the need for improved trial design strategies in early clinical studies of targeted agents.

Purpose: This phase II trial investigated the safety and efficacy of two doses of bevacizumab, a monoclonal antibody to vascular endothelial growth factor, plus fluorouracil (FU)/leucovorin (LV) versus FU/LV alone in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer., Patients and Methods: One hundred four previously untreated patients with measurable metastatic colorectal cancer were randomly assigned to one of the following three treatment groups: 36 to FU (500 mg/m(2))/LV (500 mg/m(2)) alone, 35 to FU/LV + low-dose bevacizumab (5 mg/kg every 2 weeks), and 33 to FU/LV + high-dose bevacizumab (10 mg/kg every 2 weeks). FU/LV was given weekly for the first 6 weeks of each 8-week cycle., Results: Compared with the FU/LV control arm, treatment with bevacizumab (at both dose levels) plus FU/LV resulted in higher response rates (control arm, 17%, 95% confidence interval [CI], 7% to 34%; low-dose arm, 40%, 95% CI, 24% to 58%; high-dose arm, 24%, 95% CI, 12% to 43%), longer median time to disease progression (control arm, 5.2 months, 95% CI, 3.5 to 5.6 months; low-dose arm, 9.0 months, 95% CI, 5.8 to 10.9 months; high-dose arm, 7.2 months, 95% CI, 3.8 to 9.2 months), and longer median survival (control arm, 13.8 months; 95% CI, 9.1 to 23.0 months; low-dose arm, 21.5 months, 95% CI, 17.3 to undetermined; high-dose arm, 16.1 months; 95% CI, 11.0 to 20.7 months). After cross-over, two of 22 patients had a partial response to bevacizumab alone. Thrombosis was the most significant adverse event and was fatal in one patient. Hypertension, proteinuria, and epistaxis were other potential safety concerns., Conclusion: The encouraging results of this randomized trial support further study of bevacizumab 5 mg/kg plus chemotherapy as first-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer.

Purpose: To ascertain the maximum tolerated duration of infusion of gemcitabine at 10 mg/m(2)/min in combination with mitoxantrone at 12 mg/m(2) daily for 3 days in the treatment of acute leukemia., Patients and Methods: Thirty-four patients were enrolled. Stratum I consisted of 26 patients, median age 50 years (range, 25 to 71 years), with relapsed or refractory leukemia. Stratum II contained eight patients, median age 62.5 years (range, 38 to 83 years), who had received fewer than three cycles of myelotoxic therapy for chronic myeloid leukemia or myelodysplasia that had evolved into leukemia. Patients received mitoxantrone at 12 mg/m(2) daily for 3 days. After the first mitoxantrone dose, gemcitabine was provided intravenously at 10 mg/m(2)/min with the duration adjusted by following a continuous reassessment model., Results: Severe myelosuppression, and stomatitis or esophagitis were the most common hematologic and nonhematologic dose-limiting toxicities. Several patients developed febrile neutropenia, nausea, or vomiting. In both strata, the maximum recommended duration of infusion of gemcitabine was 12 hours (7,200 mg/m(2)). The mean steady-state concentration of gemcitabine was 24.72 micromol/L and varied over a fivefold range among patients. Overall response rates in this phase I trial for strata I and II were 42% and 63%, respectively., Conclusion: Prolonged-infusion gemcitabine at a fixed dose rate of 10 mg/m(2)/min for 12 hours with 12 mg/m(2)/d mitoxantrone for 3 days is a tolerable induction regimen and achieves plasma concentrations sufficient for maximal intracellular activation. Stomatitis or esophagitis should be anticipated; however, this regimen may induce significant responses in patients with difficult-to-treat leukemias.