Search

Purpose: Tissue factor (TF) is a potential target in cervical cancer, as it is frequently highly expressed and associated with poor prognosis. Tisotumab vedotin, a first-in-class investigational antibody-drug conjugate targeting TF, has demonstrated encouraging activity in solid tumors. Here we report data from the cervical cancer cohort of innovaTV 201 phase I/II study (NCT02001623)., Patients and Methods: Patients with recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer received tisotumab vedotin 2.0 mg/kg every 3 weeks until progressive disease, unacceptable toxicity, or consent withdrawal. The primary objective was safety and tolerability. Secondary objectives included antitumor activity., Results: Of the 55 patients, 51% had received ≥2 prior lines of treatment in the recurrent or metastatic setting; 67% had prior bevacizumab + doublet chemotherapy. Fifty-one percent of patients had squamous cell carcinoma. The most common grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were anemia (11%), fatigue (9%), and vomiting (7%). No grade 5 treatment-related AEs occurred. Investigator-assessed confirmed objective response rate (ORR) was 24% [95% confidence interval (CI): 13%-37%]. Median duration of response (DOR) was 4.2 months (range: 1.0 + -9.7); four patients responded for >8 months. The 6-month progression-free survival (PFS) rate was 29% (95% CI: 17%-43%). Independent review outcomes were comparable, with confirmed ORR of 22% (95% CI: 12%-35%), median DOR of 6.0 months (range: 1.0 + -9.7), and 6-month PFS rate of 40% (95% CI: 24%-55%). Tissue factor expression was confirmed in most patients; no significant association with response was observed., Conclusions: Tisotumab vedotin demonstrated a manageable safety profile and encouraging antitumor activity in patients with previously treated recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer., (©2019 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Purpose: Nivolumab was assessed in patients with virus-associated tumors in the phase I/II CheckMate 358 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02488759). We report on patients with recurrent/metastatic cervical, vaginal, or vulvar cancers., Patients and Methods: Patients received nivolumab 240 mg every 2 weeks. Although patients with unknown human papillomavirus status were enrolled, patients known to have human papillomavirus-negative tumors were ineligible. The primary end point was objective response rate. Duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival, and overall survival were secondary end points. Safety and patient-reported outcomes were exploratory end points., Results: Twenty-four patients (cervical, n = 19; vaginal/vulvar, n = 5) were enrolled. Most patients had received prior systemic therapy for metastatic disease (cervical, 78.9%; vaginal/vulvar, 80.0%). Objective response rates were 26.3% (95% CI, 9.1 to 51.2) for cervical cancer and 20.0% (95% CI, 0.5 to 71.6) for vaginal/vulvar cancers. At a median follow-up of 19.2 months, median DOR was not reached (range, 23.3 to 29.5+ months; + indicates a censored observation) in the five responding patients in the cervical cohort; the DOR was 5.0 months in the single responding patient in the vaginal/vulvar cohort. Median overall survival was 21.9 months (95% CI, 15.1 months to not reached) among patients with cervical cancer. Any-grade treatment-related adverse events were reported in 12 of 19 patients (63.2%) in the cervical cohort and all five patients in the vaginal/vulvar cohort; there were no treatment-related deaths. In the cervical cohort, nivolumab treatment generally resulted in stabilization of patient-reported outcomes associated with health status and health-related quality of life., Conclusion: The efficacy of nivolumab in patients with recurrent/metastatic cervical and vaginal or vulvar cancers is promising and warrants additional investigation. No new safety signals were identified with nivolumab treatment in this population.

Objectives: Patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) can experience severe symptom burden and/or difficulty swallowing, leading to problems with treatment adherence/administration. In LUX-Head and Neck 1 (LH&N1; NCT01345682), second-line afatinib improved progression-free survival (PFS) versus methotrexate in patients with recurrent/metastatic HNSCC. We report adherence and safety across pre-specified and additional subgroups potentially linked to afatinib PFS benefit in LH&N1 (p16 status, smoking history), and afatinib adherence, safety and efficacy by administration (oral versus feeding tube; post-hoc analysis)., Methods: Patients were randomized (2:1) to afatinib (40 mg/day) or intravenous methotrexate (40 mg/m 2 /week)., Results: Among 320 afatinib-treated and 160 methotrexate-treated patients, 83-92% and 76-92% (of patients with data available) across all subgroups took ≥80% of treatment. Across p16 status and smoking history subgroups, the most common treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were diarrhea (70-91%), rash/acne (72-84%), stomatitis (34-73%) with afatinib; and included stomatitis (39-100%), fatigue (22-50%), nausea (19-36%) with methotrexate. Dose reduction decreased AE incidence/severity. Baseline characteristics were generally similar between oral/feeding tube (n = 276/n = 46) groups. 89%/89% (of patients with data available) took ≥80% of assigned afatinib. Median PFS was 2.6 versus 2.7 months (hazard ratio: 0.997; 95% confidence interval: 0.72-1.38). The most common afatinib-related AEs were: rash/acne (74% versus 74%), diarrhea (73% versus 65%), stomatitis (40% versus 30%)., Conclusion: Subgroup analyses of LH&N1 demonstrate that afatinib has predictable and manageable safety across patient subgroups, with high treatment adherence, and is effective via oral and feeding tube administration., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: There are few effective treatment options for patients with recurrent or metastatic head-and-neck squamous cell carcinoma. Pembrolizumab showed antitumour activity and manageable toxicity in early-phase trials. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab versus standard-of-care therapy for the treatment of head-and-neck squamous cell carcinoma., Methods: We did a randomised, open-label, phase 3 study at 97 medical centres in 20 countries. Patients with head-and-neck squamous cell carcinoma that progressed during or after platinum-containing treatment for recurrent or metastatic disease (or both), or whose disease recurred or progressed within 3-6 months of previous multimodal therapy containing platinum for locally advanced disease, were randomly assigned (1:1) in blocks of four per stratum with an interactive voice-response and integrated web-response system to receive pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks intravenously or investigator's choice of standard doses of methotrexate, docetaxel, or cetuximab intravenously (standard-of-care group). The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was analysed in the as-treated population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02252042, and is no longer enrolling patients., Findings: Between Dec 24, 2014, and May 13, 2016, 247 patients were randomly allocated to pembrolizumab and 248 were randomly allocated to standard of care. As of May 15, 2017, 181 (73%) of 247 patients in the pembrolizumab group and 207 (83%) of 248 patients in the standard-of-care group had died. Median overall survival in the intention-to-treat population was 8·4 months (95% CI 6·4-9·4) with pembrolizumab and 6·9 months (5·9-8·0) with standard of care (hazard ratio 0·80, 0·65-0·98; nominal p=0·0161). Fewer patients treated with pembrolizumab than with standard of care had grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events (33 [13%] of 246 vs 85 [36%] of 234). The most common treatment-related adverse event was hypothyroidism with pembrolizumab (in 33 [13%] patients) and fatigue with standard of care (in 43 [18%]). Treatment-related death occurred in four patients treated with pembrolizumab (unspecified cause, large intestine perforation, malignant neoplasm progression, and Stevens-Johnson syndrome) and two patients treated with standard of care (malignant neoplasm progression and pneumonia)., Interpretation: The clinically meaningful prolongation of overall survival and favourable safety profile of pembrolizumab in patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma support the further evaluation of pembrolizumab as a monotherapy and as part of combination therapy in earlier stages of disease., Funding: Merck Sharp & Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck & Co., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The molecular landscape of squamous cell carcinoma of the head and the neck (SCCHN) has been characterized and actionable or targetable genomic alterations have been identified. However, targeted therapies have very limited activity in unselected SCCHN, and the current treatment strategy is still based on tumor location and disease stage and not on tumor biology. Trying to select upfront the patients who will benefit from a specific treatment might be a way to improve patients' outcome. With the objective of optimizing the activity of targeted therapies and immunotherapy, we have designed an umbrella biomarker-driven study dedicated to recurrent and/or metastatic SCCHN patients (EORTC-1559-HNCG, NCT03088059). In this article, we review not only the different trial designs for biomarker-driven studies with their respective advantages and opportunities but also the potential pitfalls that led to the design of the EORTC-1559-HNCG protocol. We also discuss the scientific and logistic challenges of biomarker-driven trials.

Background: This open-label, multicenter, phase Ib study assessed the safety and preliminary activity of duligotuzumab, a dual-action antibody that blocks ligand binding to human epidermal growth factor receptor 3 (HER3) and epidermal growth factor receptor, in combination with chemotherapy, in the first-line treatment of patients with recurrent/metastatic squamous cell cancer of the head and neck., Methods: On day 1, duligotuzumab at a dose of 1650 mg intravenously was combined with cisplatin at a dose of 100 mg/m 2 and 5-fluorouracil at a dose of 1000 mg/m 2 /day on days 1 to 4 in treatment arm A, or carboplatin (area under the curve, 6 mg/mL/min) and paclitaxel (at a dose of 200 mg/m 2 ) in treatment arm B. Up to 6 cycles (21 days/cycle) were followed by duligotuzumab maintenance until disease progression or intolerable toxicity occurred., Results: Nine patients in arm A and 15 patients in arm B received a median of 6 cycles of chemotherapy, and a median of 11 cycles (arm A) and 9 cycles (arm B) of duligotuzumab. Dose-limiting toxicities occurred in 3 patients in arm A and 1 patient in arm B. Grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events (graded according to graded according to National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [version 4.0]) in ≥ 3 patients were neutropenia (5 patients), hypokalemia (4 patients), dehydration (3 patients), anemia (3 patients), and diarrhea (3 patients) in arm A, and neutropenia (8 patients), anemia (5 patients), febrile neutropenia (4 patients), leukopenia (3 patients), thrombocytopenia (3 patients), and hypomagnesemia (3 patients) in arm B. The chemotherapy dose was reduced in 19 of 24 patients. Sixteen patients (67%) demonstrated objective responses regardless of human papillomavirus status or neuregulin 1 (NRG1) mRNA expression (arm A: 2 confirmed complete responses and 4 confirmed partial responses; arm B: 2 confirmed complete responses and 8 confirmed partial responses)., Conclusions: Duligotuzumab in combination with cisplatin/5-fluorouracil or carboplatin/paclitaxel demonstrated encouraging activity in patients with recurrent/metastatic squamous cell cancer of the head and neck; an association with increased frequency and severity of select adverse events relative to historical data was suggestive of the potentiation of chemotherapy-related adverse events. Cancer 2016;122:3803-3811. © 2016 American Cancer Society., (© 2016 American Cancer Society.)

Lessons Learned: Cabazitaxel has activity in squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) and taxane-resistant cell lines. For the first time, cabazitaxel was investigated in incurable patients with recurrent SCCHN. Patients were randomly assigned to cabazitaxel every 3 weeks or weekly methotrexate.This phase II study did not meet its primary endpoint.Cabazitaxel has low activity in SCCHN.The toxicity profile in this population also was not favorable owing to the high rate of febrile neutropenia observed (17%)., Background: Cabazitaxel is a second-generation taxane that improves the survival of patients with metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer following docetaxel therapy. Cabazitaxel has activity in squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) and taxane-resistant cell lines. In this randomized phase II trial, we investigated cabazitaxel in patients with recurrent SCCHN., Methods: Patients with incurable SCCHN with progression after platinum-based therapy were randomly assigned to cabazitaxel every 3 weeks (cycle 1, 20 mg/m 2 , increased to 25 mg/m 2 for subsequent cycles in the absence of nonhematological adverse events [AEs] greater than grade 2 and hematological AEs greater than grade 3) or methotrexate (40 mg/m 2 /week). The patients were stratified according to their performance status and previous platinum-based chemotherapy for palliation versus curative intent. The primary endpoint was the progression-free survival rate (PFSR) at 18 weeks., Results: Of the 101 patients, 53 and 48, with a median age of 58.0 years (range, 41-80), were randomly assigned to cabazitaxel or methotrexate, respectively. The PFSR at 18 weeks was 13.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 5%-25%) for cabazitaxel and 8.3% (95% CI, 2%-20%) for methotrexate. The median progression-free survival was 1.9 months in both arms. The median overall survival was 5.0 and 3.6 months for cabazitaxel and methotrexate, respectively. More patients experienced serious adverse events with cabazitaxel than with methotrexate (54% vs. 36%). The most common drug-related grade 3-4 AE in the cabazitaxel arm was febrile neutropenia (17.3%)., Conclusion: This study did not meet its primary endpoint. Cabazitaxel has low activity in recurrent SCCHN., Competing Interests: of potential conflicts of interest may be found at the end of this article., (©AlphaMed Press; the data published online to support this summary is the property of the authors.)

Objective: To evaluate the benefit of docetaxel rechallenge in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) relapsing after an initial good response to first-line docetaxel., Patients and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the records of consecutive patients with mCRPC with a good response to first-line docetaxel [serum prostate specific antigen (PSA) decrease ≥50%; no clinical/radiological progression]. We analysed the impact of management at relapse (docetaxel rechallenge or non-taxane-based therapy) on PSA response, symptomatic response (performance status/pain/analgesic consumption), and overall survival (OS). We used multivariate stepwise logistic regression to analyse potential predictors of a favourable outcome., Results: We identified 270 good responders to first-line docetaxel. The median progression-free interval (PFI) was 6 months from the last docetaxel dose. At relapse, 223 patients were rechallenged with docetaxel (82.5%) and 47 received non-taxane-based therapy. There was no significant difference in median OS {18.2 [95% confidence interval (CI) 16.1-22.00] and 16.8 [95%CI 13.4-21.5] months, respectively, P = 0.35}. However, good PSA response and symptom relief/stable disease were more frequent on docetaxel rechallenge (40.4% vs 10.6%, P < 0.001 for PSA). A PFI of >6 months and added estramustine predicted a good PSA response and symptomatic response on docetaxel rechallenge but only a PFI of >6 months predicted longer OS. Haemoglobin (<13 g/dL) and pain were associated with reduced OS. Docetaxel rechallenge increased the incidence of grade ≥3 sensory neuropathy, nail disorders and asthenia/fatigue., Conclusions: Docetaxel rechallenge is a management option for responders to docetaxel with a PFI of >6 months, but did not prolong survival. Potential benefits should be weighed against the risk of cumulative toxicity., (© 2014 The Authors. BJU International © 2014 BJU International.)

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., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: This open-label, randomized phase III trial evaluated larotaxel/cisplatin versus gemcitabine/cisplatin as first-line treatment for locally advanced (T4b) or metastatic urothelial tract or bladder cancer., Methods: Patients were randomized to larotaxel 50 mg/m(2) with cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks (larotaxel/cisplatin) or gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, and 15 with cisplatin 70 mg/m(2) on day 1 every 4 weeks (gemcitabine/cisplatin). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS)., Results: The trial was prematurely closed following the sponsor's decision to stop clinical development of larotaxel (n = 337 randomized). The larotaxel dose was reduced to 40 mg/m(2) and cisplatin to 60 mg/m(2) following a data monitoring committee safety review of the first 97 patients. At the time of analysis, the median OS was 13.7 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 11.2-17.1] with larotaxel/cisplatin and 14.3 months (95% CI 10.5 to not reached) with gemcitabine/cisplatin [hazard ratio (HR) 1.21; 95% CI 0.83-1.76; p = 0.33]. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.6 months (95% CI 4.1-6.2) with larotaxel/cisplatin and 7.6 months (95% CI 6.6-9.1) with gemcitabine/cisplatin (HR 1.67; 95% CI 1.24-2.25). More myelosuppression was observed with gemcitabine/cisplatin., Conclusion: There was no difference in OS. Although the trial was closed prematurely, PFS appeared worse with larotaxel/cisplatin, suggesting that larotaxel/cisplatin does not improve outcomes versus cisplatin/gemcitabine., (© 2013 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Purpose of Review: After multimodal treatment, 50-60% of patients with locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck will present locoregional and/or distant relapse within 2 years. This article will review chemotherapy and/or targeted agents as treatment options for patients who progress after platinum-based chemotherapy., Recent Findings: After years when the only therapeutic option was palliative chemotherapy, monoclonal antibodies targeting the epidermal growth factor receptor have emerged as new treatments. In particular, cetuximab and panitumumab have demonstrated progression-free survival and/or overall survival benefits in the first-line palliative treatment when given in combination with platinum-based chemotherapy. Recently, second-generation compounds (zalutumumab) or irreversible pan-human epidermal receptor (pan-HER) inhibitors have also shown promising activity after platinum failure., Summary: Because median overall survival after platinum failure is less than 1 year, there is a clear requirement for new phase II/III studies with agents that have the potential to improve overall survival and quality of life. The previous use of platinum-based chemotherapy and the type of tumor response observed may substantially impact prognosis. Therefore, prior platinum use should be clearly defined in future clinical trials to enable a more accurate interpretation of the data.

Concurrent chemotherapy and radiotherapy (CRT) has become standard treatment for many patients with advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). This has led to controversy concerning the role of neck dissection (ND) in this setting. The current debate is focused on N2-N3 disease and the ability of a clinical complete response to predict the absence of viable cells in the ND specimen. Proponents of a systematic planned ND argue that it improves regional control and possibly disease-specific survival. They assert that a clinical response does not predict the pathologic response, and that in the event of recurrence in the neck, a surgical salvage procedure is unlikely to succeed. Conversely, there are many arguments in favor of performing ND only for patients who have evidence of residual neck disease because of the very low probability of isolated neck recurrence following a complete response. Proponents argue that for complete responders, planned ND is associated with no survival benefit. As planned surgery will only benefit patients with residual disease in the neck alone, there is a high rate of unnecessary ND with its associated morbidity. Another question concerns the appropriate type of ND to be performed. Even if required after chemoradiation, selective ND is oncologically feasible with minimal morbidity. Lastly, robust data from a randomized trial demonstrating the superiority of one approach vs. the other are lacking. After conducting a review of recent literature on the subject, the authors conclude that planned ND is not necessary for patients with complete response because of the availability of improved diagnostic follow up modalities, and the increased sensitivity to CRT of HNSCC, particularly HPV associated tumors., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: No treatments are presently available to increase survival in patients with recurrent or metastatic squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck after failure of platinum-based chemotherapy. We aimed to assess efficacy and safety of zalutumumab, a human IgG1 monoclonal antibody targeting the epidermal growth factor receptor, for overall survival in such patients., Methods: In our open-label, parallel-group, phase 3, randomised trial, we randomly allocated patients with squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck who were regarded as incurable with standard therapy, a WHO performance status of 0-2, and progressive disease within 6 months of platinum-based therapy in a 2:1 ratio to receive zalutumumab plus best supportive care (zalutumumab group) or best supportive care with optional methotrexate (control group) at medical centres in Europe, Brazil, and Canada. Randomisation was done via a centralised interactive voice-response system, stratified by performance status. Data were analysed when the randomisation code was broken, after the completion of the accrual and cleaning of the relevant data. An independent review committee, masked to treatment assignment, assessed tumour response and disease progression according to response evaluation criteria in solid tumours. Zalutumumab was given weekly by individual dose titration on the basis of skin rash. After a prespecified 231 deaths, we included all randomised patients in the survival analyses and all patients receiving at least one session of therapy in the safety analysis. The primary endpoint was overall survival, although progression-free survival was also assessed. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00382031., Findings: We randomly allocated 191 (67%) of 286 eligible patients to the zalutumumab group and 95 (33%) to the control group. Median overall survival was 6.7 months (95% CI 5.8-7.0) in the zalutumumab group and 5.2 months (4.1-6.4) in the control group (hazard ratio [HR] for death, stratified by WHO performance status, was 0.77, 97.06% CI 0.57-1.05; unadjusted p=0.0648). Progression-free survival was longer in the zalutumumab group than in the control group (HR for progression or death, stratified by WHO performance status, was 0.63, 95% CI 0.47-0.84; p=0.0012). 189 patients given zalutumumab and 94 controls were included in the safety analysis. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were rash (39 [21%] patients in the zalutumumab group vs none in the control group), anaemia (11 [6%] vs five [5%]), and pneumonia (nine [5%] vs two [2%]). 28 (15%) patients in the zalutumumab group had grade 3/4 infections compared with eight (9%) in the control group. The most common serious adverse events were tumour haemorrhage (28 [15%] patients given zalutumumab vs 13 [14%] controls), pneumonia (13 [7%] vs three [3%]), and dysphagia (11 [6%] vs two [2%])., Interpretation: Although zalutumumab did not increase overall survival, progression-free survival was extended in patients with recurrent squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck who had failed platinum-based chemotherapy. Zalutumumab dose titration on the basis of rash is safe., Funding: Genmab., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

PURPOSE To assess the efficacy and toxicity of sunitinib monotherapy in palliative squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN). PATIENTS AND METHODS Thirty-eight patients with SCCHN having evidence of progressive disease (PD) were treated with sunitinib 37.5 mg/d given continuously until PD or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end point was the rate of disease control, defined as stable disease (SD) or partial response (PR) at 6 to 8 weeks after treatment initiation (two-stage design, Simon). Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) was performed in a subset of patients before and 6 to 8 weeks after treatment. The volume transfer constant of the contrast agent (K(trans)) was used to measure changes in the microcirculation blood flow and endothelial permeability of the tumor. Results A PR was observed in one patient, SD in 18, and PD in 19 (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors [RECIST]), resulting in a disease control rate of 50%. Among the 18 patients with SD, there were five unconfirmed PRs and six additional minor responses. A significant decrease in K(trans) was seen in three of the four patients who received DCE-MRI monitoring. Grade 5 head and neck bleeds occurred in four patients. Local complications, including the appearance or worsening of tumor skin ulceration or tumor fistula, were recorded in 15 patients. CONCLUSION Sunitinib demonstrated modest activity in palliative SSCHN. The severity of some of the complications highlights the importance of improved patient selection for future studies with sunitinib in head and neck cancer. Sunitinib should not be used outside clinical trials in SSCHN.