Search

Background The phosphatidylinositol-3 kinase pathway is often altered in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC), and is involved in the resistance to EGFR inhibitors. Objective We investigated the dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), maximum tolerated dose, pharmacokinetics, and preliminary efficacy of the combination of copanlisib, an intravenous, pan-class I PI3K inhibitor, with the anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody cetuximab in recurrent and/or metastatic HNSCC patients in a phase I dose-escalation trial. Patients and methods Copanlisib was given intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15 of 28-day cycles at the dose of 45 mg and 30 mg, in combination with standard doses of weekly cetuximab (400 mg/m 2 loading dose followed by 250 mg/m 2 on days 8, 15, and 22, and weekly thereafter). Results Three patients received copanlisib 45 mg, of whom two experienced grade 3 hyperglycemia during Cycle 1 that met the DLT criteria. Eight patients were then treated with copanlisib at the dose of 30 mg. Because of the occurrence of hyperglycemia, a premedication with metformine was introduced on the day of the injections. No DLTs were reported at this dose level. The trial was stopped early because of the unfavourable toxicity profile of the combination. Among eight evaluable patients for response, four patients (50%) had disease stabilization according to RECIST1.1 as best response. Conclusion Copanlisib combined with cetuximab demonstrated unfavorable toxicity and limited efficacy in heavily pretreated recurrent and/or metastatic HNSCC patients.Trial registration NCT02822482, Date of registration: June 2016., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Patients with platinum-refractory recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck have few treatment options and poor prognosis. Nivolumab significantly improved survival of this patient population when compared with standard single-agent therapy of investigator's choice in Checkmate 141; here we report the effect of nivolumab on patient-reported outcomes (PROs)., Methods: CheckMate 141 was a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial in patients with recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck who progressed within 6 months after platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks (n=240) or investigator's choice (n=121) of methotrexate (40-60 mg/m 2 of body surface area), docetaxel (30-40 mg/m 2 ), or cetuximab (250 mg/m 2 after a loading dose of 400 mg/m 2 ) until disease progression, intolerable toxicity, or withdrawal of consent. On Jan 26, 2016, the independent data monitoring committee reviewed the data at the planned interim analysis and declared overall survival superiority for nivolumab over investigator's choice therapy (primary endpoint; described previously). The protocol was amended to allow patients in the investigator's choice group to cross over to nivolumab. All patients not on active therapy are being followed for survival. As an exploratory endpoint, PROs were assessed at baseline, week 9, and every 6 weeks thereafter using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (QLQ-C30), the EORTC head and neck cancer-specific module (EORTC QLQ-H&N35), and the three-level European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) questionnaire. Differences within and between treatment groups in PROs were analysed by ANCOVA among patients with baseline and at least one other assessment. All randomised patients were included in the time to clinically meaningful deterioration analyses. Median time to clinically meaningful deterioration was analysed by Kaplan-Meier methods. CheckMate 141 was registered with ClinicalTrials.org, number NCT02105636., Findings: Patients were enrolled between May 29, 2014, and July 31, 2015, and subsequently 361 patients were randomly assigned to receive nivolumab (n=240) or investigator's choice (n=121). Among them, 129 patients (93 in the nivolumab group and 36 in the investigator's choice group) completed any of the PRO questionnaires at baseline and at least one other assessment. Treatment with nivolumab resulted in adjusted mean changes from baseline to week 15 ranging from -2·1 to 5·4 across functional and symptom domains measured by the EORTC QLQ-C30, with no domains indicating clinically meaningful deterioration. By contrast, eight (53%) of the 15 domains in the investigator's choice group showed clinically meaningful deterioration (10 points or more) at week 15 (change from baseline range, -24·5 to 2·4). Similarly, on the EORTC QLQ-H&N35, clinically meaningful worsening at week 15 was seen in no domains in the nivolumab group and eight (44%) of 18 domains in the investigator's choice group. Patients in the nivolumab group had a clinically meaningful improvement (according to a difference of 7 points or greater) in adjusted mean change from baseline to week 15 on the EQ-5D visual analogue scale, in contrast to a clinically meaningful deterioration in the investigator's choice group (7·3 vs -7·8). Differences between groups were significant and clinically meaningful at weeks 9 and 15 in favour of nivolumab for role functioning, social functioning, fatigue, dyspnoea, and appetite loss on the EORTC QLQ-C30 and pain and sensory problems on the EORTC QLQ-H&N35. Median time to deterioration was significantly longer with nivolumab versus investigator's choice for 13 (37%) of 35 domains assessed across the three questionnaires., Interpretation: In this exploratory analysis of CheckMate 141, nivolumab stabilised symptoms and functioning from baseline to weeks 9 and 15, whereas investigator's choice led to clinically meaningful deterioration. Nivolumab delayed time to deterioration of patient-reported quality-of-life outcomes compared with single-agent therapy of investigator's choice in patients with platinum-refractory recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. In view of the major unmet need in this population and the importance of maintaining or improving quality of life for patients with recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck, these data support nivolumab as a new standard-of-care option in this setting., Funding: Bristol-Myers Squibb., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Antiproliferative activity of somatostatin analogues (SSAs) has been demonstrated in digestive neuroendocrine tumours but few data have been published on pulmonary carcinoids (PC). The aim of this retrospective study was to report the antitumour activity of SSAs in patients with progressive, metastatic PC., Methods: Patients with PC and treated with SSA monotherapy were reviewed. Disease was classified according to the tumour slope prior to SSA initiation as rapidly progressive (at least 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of target lesions or the appearance of one or more new lesions within 6 months) or slowly progressive (if progression occurred over 6 months). Survival outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). We additionally examined the overall response rate and safety. Prognostic factors associated with PFS and OS were sought. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using the Cox model., Results: Among 67 patients reviewed, 61 were included in the study. Forty-one (67%) of them exhibited slowly progressive disease prior to SSAs, 41 (67%) had atypical carcinoids and 29 (48%) had functioning tumours. Forty-six (76%) patients had received SSAs as first-line therapy. The best overall response was stable disease in 47 (77%) patients. The median duration of SSAs was 13.7 months. With a median follow-up of 5.8 years, median PFS and OS were 17.4 (95% CI: 8.7-26.0) and 58.4 (95% CI: 44.2-102.7) months, respectively. Functioning tumours and slowly progressive disease were significantly associated with longer PFS: HR = 0.48 ([95% CI: 0.24-0.95], p = 0.03) and HR = 7.43 ([95% CI: 3.02-18.25], p < 0.0001), respectively. Only functioning tumours remained significantly associated with OS: HR = 0.33 ([95% CI: 0.14-0.79], p = 0.01). Treatment had been discontinued in two patients due to side-effects., Conclusions: Median PFS observed in our study is encouraging for PC patients. Patients with functioning tumours and slowly progressive disease treated with SSAs have better prognosis., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

To assess the use of radiotherapy (RT) or concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CRT) following taxane-based induction chemotherapy (T-ICT) in locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (LAHNSCC) and to evaluate the tolerability of CRT after T-ICT. From 01/2006 to 08/2012, 173 LAHNSCC patients treated as a curative intent by T-ICT, followed by definitive RT/CRT were included in this analysis. There was an 86% objective response (OR) after ICT among 154 evaluable patients. Forty-four patients received less than three cycles (25%) and 20 received only one cycle of T-ICT. The 3-year actuarial overall survival (OS) was 49% and there was no OS difference according to the type of ICT (regimen or number of cycle) or the addition of concurrent CT (cisplatin, carboplatin, or cetuximab) to RT. In multivariate analysis (MVA), clinically involved lymph node (cN+), age more than 60 years, the absence of OR after ICT, and performance status of at least 1 predicted for a decreased OS, with hazard ratios (HR) of 2.8, 2.2, 2.1, and 2, respectively. The 3-year actuarial locoregional control (LRC) and distant control (DC) rates were 52 and 73%, respectively. In MVA, the absence of OR after ICT (HR: 3.2), cN+ (HR: 3), and age more than 60 years (HR: 1.7) were prognostic for a lower LRC whereas cN+ (HR: 4.2) and carboplatin-based T-ICT (HR: 2.9) were prognostic for a lower DC. The number of cycles (≤ 2) received during ICT was borderline significant for DC in the MVA (P=0.08). Among patients receiving less than or equal to three cycles of ICT, higher outcomes were observed in patients who received cisplatin-based T-ICT (vs. carboplatin-based T-ICT) or subsequent CRT (vs. RT). T-ICT in our experience, followed by RT or CRT, raises several questions on the role and type of induction, and the efficacy of CRT over RT. The role of RT or CRT following induction, although feasible in these advanced patients, awaits answers from randomized trials.

Introduction: Radiation recall (RR) is an acute inflammatory reaction confined to previously irradiated areas after the administration of various pharmacological agents. A diverse range of chemotherapies has been associated with RR but no case series with targeted therapies (TT) has been reported., Patients and Methods: From a database of 346,933 cancer patients ≥18 years treated at Institut Gustave Roussy between June 1986 and August 2012, clinical data and the pattern of treatment of TT-induced RR were collected. Results were compared with those of prior TT-induced RR publications., Results: Sixteen patients with different tumour types were diagnosed with RR observed in the heart, bladder, salivary glands, skin and gastrointestinal tract. The median duration of RR was 1.7 weeks (range: 0.1-13.7) and median time to onset from TT to RR was 16.9 weeks (range: 1-86.9). TT consisted of inhibitors of the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) (n=5), endothelial growth factor receptor (EGFR) (n=2), integrin (n=2), histone deacetylase (HDAC) (n=2), cell division cycle 7 (CDC7) (n=1), insulin-like growth factor 1 receptor (IGFR1) (n=1), cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) (n=1), BRAF (n=1) and a vascular disrupting agent (VDA) (n=1). Thirteen incriminated TT (81%) were evaluated during early clinical trials and RR led to discontinuation of TT in six patients. All patients had previously received radiotherapy at a median biologically effective dose (BED) of 47 Gy (range: 20-70). The median interval from radiation to TT was 30 months (range: 0.3-363). Immunohistochemical analysis of skin biopsy specimens did not show any transforming growth factor-beta (TGF-β) activation. TT-induced RR characteristics in our population were comparable to those of the nine other cases previously reported in the literature., Conclusion: This is the largest case series ever reported on TT-induced RR. RR could be a potential dose-limiting toxicity in early clinical trials. Research is warranted to further understand the exact pathophysiology of this rare but clinically relevant phenomenon., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Results from a phase 2 trial of the TPEx chemotherapy regimen (docetaxel-platinum-cetuximab) showed promising results, with a median overall survival of 14·0 months in first-line recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous-cell carcinoma (HNSCC). We therefore aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of the TPEx regimen with the standard of care EXTREME regimen (platinum-fluorouracil-cetuximab) in this setting.Methods: This was a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 2 trial, done in 68 centres (cancer centres, university and general hospitals, and private clinics) in France, Spain, and Germany. Eligible patients were aged 18-70 years with histologically confirmed recurrent or metastatic HNSCC unsuitable for curative treatment; had at least one measurable lesion according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1; and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 1 or less. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) using the TenAlea website by investigators or delegated clinical research associates to the TPEx regimen or the EXTREME regimen, with minimisation by ECOG performance status, type of disease evolution, previous cetuximab treatment, and country. The TPEx regimen consisted of docetaxel 75 mg/m2 and cisplatin 75 mg/m2, both intravenously on day 1, and cetuximab on days 1, 8, and 15 (intravenously 400 mg/m2 on day 1 of cycle 1 and 250 mg/m2 weekly subsequently). Four cycles were repeated every 21 days with systematic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) support at each cycle. In case of disease control after four cycles, intravenous cetuximab 500 mg/m2 was continued every 2 weeks as maintenance therapy until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The EXTREME regimen consisted of fluorouracil 4000 mg/m2 on day 1-4, cisplatin 100 mg/m2 on day 1, and cetuximab on days 1, 8, and 15 (400 mg/m2 on day 1 of cycle 1 and 250 mg/m2 weekly subsequently) all delivered intravenously. Six cycles were delivered every 21 days followed by weekly 250 mg/m2 cetuximab as maintenance therapy in case of disease control. G-CSF support was not mandatory per the protocol in the EXTREME regimen. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population; safety was analysed in all patients who received at least one dose of chemotherapy or cetuximab. Enrolment is closed and this is the final analysis. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02268695.Findings: Between Oct 10, 2014, and Nov 29, 2017, 541 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to the two treatment regimens (271 to TPEx, 270 to EXTREME). Two patients in the TPEx group had major deviations in consent forms and were not included in the final analysis. Median follow-up was 34·4 months (IQR 26·6-44·8) in the TPEx group and 30·2 months (25·5-45·3) in the EXTREME group. At data cutoff, 209 patients had died in the TPEx group and 218 had died in the EXTREME group. Overall survival did not differ significantly between the groups (median 14·5 months [95% CI 12·5-15·7] in the TPEx group and 13·4 months [12·2-15·4] in the EXTREME group; hazard ratio 0·89 [95% CI 0·74-1·08]; p=0·23). 214 (81%) of 263 patients in the TPEx group versus 246 (93%) of 265 patients in the EXTREME group had grade 3 or worse adverse events during chemotherapy (p<0·0001). In the TPEx group, 118 (45%) of 263 patients had at least one serious adverse event versus 143 (54%) of 265 patients in the EXTREME group. 16 patients in the TPEx group and 21 in the EXTREME group died in association with adverse events, including seven patients in each group who had fatal infections (including febrile neutropenia). Eight deaths in the TPEx group and 11 deaths in the EXTREME group were assessed as treatment related, most frequently sepsis or septic shock (four in each treatment group).Interpretation: Although the trial did not meet its primary endpoint, with no significant improvement in overall survival with TPEx versus EXTREME, the TPEx regimen had a favourable safety profile. The TPEx regimen could provide an alternative to standard of care with the EXTREME regimen in the first-line treatment of patients with recurrent or metastatic HNSCC, especially for those who might not be good candidates for up-front pembrolizumab treatment.Funding: Merck Santé and Chugai Pharma. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary Background Patients with recurrent or metastatic squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck (HNSCC) progressing after first-line platinum regimens have a poor prognosis and few treatment options. Afatinib, an irreversible ERBB family blocker, has shown efficacy in a phase 2 study in this setting. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of afatinib compared with methotrexate as second-line treatment in patients with recurrent or metastatic HNSCC progressing on or after platinum-based therapy. Methods In this open-label, phase 3, randomised controlled trial conducted in 101 centres in 19 countries, we enrolled patients aged 18 years or older with histologically or cytologically confirmed HNSCC that was recurrent, metastatic, or both who had progressed on or after first-line platinum-based therapy, were not amenable for salvage surgery or radiotherapy, and who had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1. Previous treatment with more than one systemic regimen in this setting was not allowed; previous treatment with EGFR-targeted antibody therapy (but not EGFR-targeted tyrosine-kinase inhibitors) was allowed. We randomly assigned eligible patients in a 2:1 ratio to receive oral afatinib (40 mg/day) or intravenous methotrexate (40 mg/m 2 per week), stratified by ECOG performance status and previous EGFR-targeted antibody therapy for recurrent or metastatic disease. Randomisation was done centrally with an interactive voice or web-based response system. Clinicians and patients were not masked to treatment allocation; independent review of tumour response was done in a blinded manner. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival as assessed by an independent, central imaging review committee. Efficacy analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population and safety analyses were done in patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This ongoing study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT01345682 . Findings Between Jan 10, 2012, and Dec 12, 2013, we enrolled 483 patients and randomly assigned 322 to afatinib and 161 to methotrexate. After a median follow-up of 6·7 months (IQR 3·1–9·0), progression-free survival was longer in the afatinib group than in the methotrexate group (median 2·6 months [95% CI 2·0–2·7] for the afatinib group vs 1·7 months [1·5–2·4] for the methotrexate group; hazard ratio [HR] 0·80 [95% CI 0·65–0·98], p=0·030). The most frequent grade 3 or 4 drug-related adverse events were rash or acne (31 [10%] of 320 patients in the afatinib group vs none of 160 patients in the methotrexate group), diarrhoea (30 [9%] vs three [2%]), stomatitis (20 [6%] vs 13 [8%]), fatigue (18 [6%] vs five [3%]), and neutropenia (1 [<1%] vs 11 [7%]); serious adverse events occurred in 44 (14%) of afatinib-treated patients and 18 (11%) of methotrexate-treated patients. Interpretation Afatinib was associated with significant improvements in progression-free survival and had a manageable safety profile. These findings provide important new insights into the treatment of this patient population and support further investigations with irreversible ERBB family blockers in HNSCC. Funding Boehringer Ingelheim. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Worldwide, hea d and neck carcinomas account for 5% of all malignancies. Two-thirds of patients relapse after initial multimodal therapy. Until early 2000, the median overall survival (OS) of metastatic patients was about 6 months. Recently, new drugs have been incorporated in patient management, thus enabling an increase in OS. This review aims to define the comprehensive medical management of patients with relapsing head and neck carcinoma. Methods: A comprehensive review of the literature was made targeting four topics: first- and second-line treatment, supportive care, and management of elderly patients. Results: The choice of first- or second-line treatments is mainly based on performance status. In the elderly, geriatric assessment could be helpful. For PS 0.1 patients, the standard first-line treatment is 6 cycles of cisplatin-5FU-cetuximab. In the event of response, cetuximab alone is prolonged until progression or unacceptable toxicity. For second-line treatment, several options are currently available: enrolment in clinical trials, single-agent therapy (methotrexate, taxane, cetuximab), and best supportive care (BSC). Supportive care has to be initiated very early in the course of the disease to prevent pain, dysphagia and malnutrition. In elderly patients, the therapeutic options are: first-line treatment with the EXTREME regimen replacing cisplatin by carboplatin for patients in good general condition or meth-otrexate alone for other patients. BSC continues to be given to all patients (i.e. poor general conditions). Conclusion: In spite of numerous pending issues requiring further investigation, these recommendations seem to be routinely applicable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]