Maintenance Therapy with Biweekly Cetuximab: Optimizing Schedule Can Preserve Activity and Improves Compliance in Advanced Head and Neck Cancer

A phase II trial of paclitaxel plus biweekly cetuximab for patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck cancer previously treated with both platinum-based chemotherapy and anti-PD-1 antibody

BACKGROUND

An important unmet need for new treatment options remains for patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (R/M-HNSCC) previously treated with both platinum-based chemotherapy and anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) antibody. Retrospective studies suggest that previous treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitor might augment the efficacy of subsequent chemotherapy. Here, we conducted a phase II trial aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of paclitaxel plus biweekly cetuximab for patients in this setting.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a single-arm, multicenter, phase II trial. Key eligibility criteria were R/M-HNSCC, and previous treatment with both platinum-based chemotherapy and PD-1 antibody. Paclitaxel plus biweekly cetuximab consisted of weekly paclitaxel 100 mg/m2 (days 1, 8, 15) and biweekly cetuximab 500 mg/m2 (days 1, 15) with a cycle of 28 days until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), disease control rate (DCR), and adverse events (AEs) (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0).

RESULTS

Between August 2020 and August 2022, 35 patients were enrolled, of whom 33 were assessable for response. ORR was 69.6% (95% confidence interval 51.2% to 84.4%). With a median follow-up period for survivors of 16.6 months, median PFS and OS were 5.5 and 13.3 months, respectively. DCR was 93.7%. Twenty-three patients (65%) experienced grade 3 or 4 AEs, including neutropenia (34%), infection (14%), leukopenia (11%), mucositis (8%), and pneumonitis (8%). Eight patients discontinued study treatment due to treatment-related AEs, and no treatment-related death was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Paclitaxel plus biweekly cetuximab showed highly encouraging efficacy and manageable toxicities in R/M-HNSCC patients previously treated with both platinum-based chemotherapy and PD-1 antibody. This combination therapy warrants further investigation in this setting.

Prognostic value of diabetes and metformin use in a real-life population of head and neck cancer patients

Introduction

Head and neck carcinoma (HNC) is a disease with a poor prognosis despite currently available treatments. The management of patients with this tumor is often complicated by several comorbidities. Among these, diabetes is the second most frequent and its influence on the prognosis is not known.

Methods

In this work, we collected data on progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of one hundred twenty-three patients with HNC who received biweekly cetuximab maintenance treatment after first-line chemotherapy. We then compared the survival of nondiabetic patients versus diabetics' one.

Results

Surprisingly, both PFS (4 vs. 5 months, HR 2.297, p < 0.0001) and OS (7 vs. 10 months, HR 3.138, p < 0.0001) were in favor of diabetic patients, even after excluding other clinical confounding factors. In addition, we also studied survivals in patients taking metformin, a widely used oral antidiabetic drug that has demonstrated antitumor efficacy in some cancers. Indeed, diabetic patients taking metformin had better PFS and OS than those not taking it, 7 vs. 5 months (HR 0.56, p = 0.0187) and 11 vs. 8.5 months (HR 0.53, p = 0.017), respectively.

Discussion

In conclusion, real-world outcomes of biweekly cetuximab maintenance remain comparable to clinical trials. The prognostic role of diabetes and metformin was confirmed to be significant in our series, but further prospective studies are needed for a definitive evaluation.

Biweekly administration of cetuximab in Japanese patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck cancer

BACKGROUND

Cetuximab (Cmab) plays an important role in the treatment for recurrent or metastatic head and neck cancer (R/M HNC). To date, however, no safety data on biweekly administration of cetuximab at a dose of 500 mg/m² (biweekly Cmab) for Japanese HNC patients have been available.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the clinical records of five R/M HNC patients who received biweekly Cmab in our institute between January 2016 and September 2021 and compared the safety profile between two phases of weekly 250 mg/m² and biweekly 500 mg/m² Cmab in the identical patients.

RESULTS

All patients initially received Cmab in combination with chemotherapy. Chemotherapy consisted of paclitaxel plus carboplatin in two patients, cisplatin + 5-FU in one patient, and paclitaxel in two patients. Three patients switched treatment schedule from weekly Cmab to biweekly Cmab, while two patients received biweekly Cmab after completion of chemotherapy. The main reason for switching to biweekly Cmab was an unacceptably long commuting time to the hospital. The median duration of Cmab was 217 days (49-321) during weekly Cmab with or without chemotherapy and 42 days (28-175) during biweekly Cmab. Median dose of biweekly Cmab was 4 (3-12). During biweekly Cmab, worsened (Grade ≥ 2) toxicities were observed in two patients: one with grade 2 dry skin and the second with grade 2 skin infection. None developed grade ≥ 3 adverse events or discontinued treatment due to Cmab-related adverse events.

CONCLUSION

Biweekly Cmab was well tolerated and did not demonstrate severe toxicities related to Cmab for R/M HNC.

Treatment effectiveness in a rare oncology indication: Lessons from an external control cohort study

Real-world data (RWD) reflecting patient treatment in routine clinical practice can be used to develop external control groups for single-arm trials. External controls can provide valuable benchmark results on potential comparator drug effectiveness, particularly in rare indications when randomized controlled trials are either infeasible or unethical. This paper describes lessons learned from a descriptive real-world external control cohort study conducted to provide benchmark data for a single-arm clinical trial in a rare oncology biomarker driven disease. Conducting external control cohort studies to evaluate treatment effectiveness in rare indications likely will present with data and analysis challenges as seen in the example study. However, there are mitigating measures that can be applied in the study design, identification of RWD sources, and data analysis. The lessons learned and reported here with a proposal of an external control study framework can provide guidance for future research in this area, and may be applicable as well in other rare indications. Taking these learnings into consideration, the use of real-world external controls to contextualize treatment effectiveness in rare indications is a valuable approach and warrants further application in the future.

Interventions for the treatment of oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancer: chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancers are the most common cancers arising in the head and neck. Treatment of oral cavity cancer is generally surgery followed by radiotherapy, whereas oropharyngeal cancers, which are more likely to be advanced at the time of diagnosis, are managed with radiotherapy or chemoradiation. Surgery for oral cancers can be disfiguring and both surgery and radiotherapy have significant functional side effects. The development of new chemotherapy agents, new combinations of agents and changes in the relative timing of surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy treatments may potentially bring about increases in both survival and quality of life for this group of patients. This review updates one last published in 2011.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether chemotherapy, in addition to radiotherapy and/or surgery for oral cavity and oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma results in improved overall survival, improved disease-free survival and/or improved locoregional control, when incorporated as either induction therapy given prior to locoregional treatment (i.e. radiotherapy or surgery), concurrent with radiotherapy or in the adjuvant (i.e. after locoregional treatment with radiotherapy or surgery) setting.

SEARCH METHODS

An information specialist searched 4 bibliographic databases up to 15 September 2021 and used additional search methods to identify published, unpublished and ongoing studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) where more than 50% of participants had primary tumours in the oral cavity or oropharynx, and that evaluated the addition of chemotherapy to other treatments such as radiotherapy and/or surgery, or compared two or more chemotherapy regimens or modes of administration.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

For this update, we assessed the new included trials for their risk of bias and at least two authors extracted data from them. Our primary outcome was overall survival (time to death from any cause). Secondary outcomes were disease-free survival (time to disease recurrence or death from any cause) and locoregional control (response to primary treatment). We contacted trial authors for additional information or clarification when necessary.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 100 studies with 18,813 participants. None of the included trials were at low risk of bias.  For induction chemotherapy, we reported the results for contemporary regimens that will be of interest to clinicians and people being treated for oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancers. Overall, there is insufficient evidence to clearly demonstrate a survival benefit from induction chemotherapy with platinum plus 5-fluorouracil prior to radiotherapy (hazard ratio (HR) for death 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70 to 1.04, P = 0.11; 7427 participants, 5 studies; moderate-certainty evidence), prior to surgery (HR for death 1.06, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.60, P = 0.77; 198 participants, 1 study; low-certainty evidence) or prior to concurrent chemoradiation (CRT) with cisplatin (HR for death 0.71, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.35, P = 0.30; 389 participants, 2 studies; low-certainty evidence). There is insufficient evidence to support the use of an induction chemotherapy regimen with cisplatin plus 5-fluorouracil plus docetaxel prior to CRT with cisplatin (HR for death 1.08, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.44, P = 0.63; 760 participants, 3 studies; low-certainty evidence).  There is insufficient evidence to support the use of adjuvant chemotherapy over observation only following surgery (HR for death 0.95, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.22, P = 0.67; 353 participants, 5 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). Among studies that compared post-surgical adjuvant CRT, as compared to post-surgical RT, adjuvant CRT showed a survival benefit (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.98, P = 0.03; 1097 participants, 4 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). Primary treatment with CRT, as compared to radiotherapy alone,  was associated with a reduction in the risk of death (HR for death 0.74, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.83, P < 0.00001; 2852 participants, 24 studies; moderate-certainty evidence).  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The results of this review demonstrate that chemotherapy in the curative-intent treatment of oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancers only seems to be of benefit when used in specific circumstances together with locoregional treatment. The  evidence does not show a clear survival benefit from the use of induction chemotherapy prior to radiotherapy, surgery or CRT. Adjuvant CRT reduces the risk of death by 16%, as compared to radiotherapy alone. Concurrent chemoradiation as compared to radiation alone is associated with a greater than 20% improvement in overall survival; however, additional research is required to inform how the specific chemotherapy regimen may influence this benefit.

Perineural invasion/lymphovascular invasion double positive predicts distant metastasis and poor survival in T3-4 oral squamous cell carcinoma

Postoperative adjuvant therapy has been indicated by advanced T classification for T3–4 oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) and the significance of perineural invasion (PNI) and lymphovascular invasion (LVI) in treatment for T3–4 OSCC remains unclear. Ninety-eight cumulative patients with T3–4 OSCC who underwent curative surgery between Jan 2002 and Dec 2010 were recruited and analyzed. Twenty-seven (27.6%) patients were PNI/LVI double positive. PNI/LVI double positive demonstrated independent predictive values for higher neck metastasis (LN+), higher distant metastasis (DM) and low 5-year disease-specific survival (DSS) rates (p < 0.001, p = 0.017, and p < 0.001, respectively) after controlling for other pathologic features of the primary tumors. A high DM rate of 33.3% was noted in PNI/LVI double-positive patients. Among the PNI/LVI double negative, single positive to double positive subgroups, increasing LN+, DM rates and decreasing DSS rate were observed. Among the 44 LN+ patients, PNI/LVI double positive remained associated with a markedly high DM rate of 42.9% and a poor 5-year DSS of 27.7%. PNI/LVI double positive plays important roles in prognostication and potential clinical application for T3–4 OSCC by independently predicting LN+, DM, and poor DSS, and can be used as a good marker to select DM high-risk patients for novel adjuvant therapy trials.

Complement System: a Neglected Pathway in Immunotherapy

Approved for the treatment of autoimmune diseases, hematological malignancies, and solid cancers, several monoclonal antibodies (mAb) make use of complement in their mechanism of action. Such an assessment is based on comprehensive investigations that used mouse models, in vitro studies, and analyses from patients at initiation (basal level to highlight deficiencies) and after treatment initiation (mAb impact on complement), which have further provided key insights into the importance of the complement activation and/or complement deficiencies in mAb activity. Accordingly, new approaches can now be developed with the final objective of increasing the clinical efficacy of mAb. These improvements include (i) the concurrent administration of fresh frozen plasma during mAb therapy; (ii) mAb modifications such as immunoglobulin G subclass switching, Fc mutation, or IgG hexamerization to improve the fixation and activation of C1q; (iii) optimization of the target recognition to induce a higher complement-dependent cytotoxicity (CDC) and/or complement-dependant cellular cytotoxicity (CDCC); and (iv) the control of soluble and cellular complement inhibitors.