A randomized phase II study of ganetespib, a heat shock protein 90 inhibitor, in combination with docetaxel in second-line therapy of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (GALAXY-1)

BACKGROUND

This trial was designed to evaluate the activity and safety of ganetespib in combination with docetaxel in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and to identify patient populations most likely to benefit from the combination.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with one prior systemic therapy for advanced disease were eligible. Docetaxel (75 mg/m(2) on day 1) was administered alone or with ganetespib (150 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 15) every 3 weeks. The primary end points were progression-free survival (PFS) in two subgroups of the adenocarcinoma population: patients with elevated lactate dehydrogenase (eLDH) and mutated KRAS (mKRAS).

RESULTS

Of 385 patients enrolled, 381 were treated. Early in the trial, increased hemoptysis and lack of efficacy were observed in nonadenocarcinoma patients (n = 71); therefore, only patients with adenocarcinoma histology were subsequently enrolled. Neutropenia was the most common grade ≥3 adverse event: 41% in the combination arm versus 42% in docetaxel alone. There was no improvement in PFS for the combination arm in the eLDH (N = 114, adjusted hazard ratio (HR) = 0.77, P = 0.1134) or mKRAS (N = 89, adjusted HR = 1.11, P = 0.3384) subgroups. In the intent-to-treat adenocarcinoma population, there was a trend in favor of the combination, with PFS (N = 253, adjusted HR = 0.82, P = 0.0784) and overall survival (OS) (adjusted HR = 0.84, P = 0.1139). Exploratory analyses showed significant benefit of the ganetespib combination in the prespecified subgroup of adenocarcinoma patients diagnosed with advanced disease >6 months before study entry (N = 177): PFS (adjusted HR = 0.74, P = 0.0417); OS (adjusted HR = 0.69, P = 0.0191).

CONCLUSION

Advanced lung adenocarcinoma patients treated with ganetespib in combination with docetaxel had an acceptable safety profile. While the study's primary end points were not met, significant prolongation of PFS and OS was observed in patients >6 months from diagnosis of advanced disease, a subgroup chosen as the target population for the phase III study.

Prognostic and predictable value of COX2 expression in Russian women with stage I breast cancer

80

Background: Some previous studies found worse prognosis among cyclooxygenase-2 (COX2)-expressing breast cancers; we study prognostic and predictiable value of COX2 expression in breast cancer stage I. Methods: our study included Russian women with breast cancer stage I (n=315) treated in RCRC, RMAPE (1985-2009). A Tissue Micro Array (TMA) with triplicate 1 mm tumor tissue punches taken from tumor blocks was constructed in LUMC; sections were immunohistochemically stained for ER, PR, HER2-status, Ki67 (by standard morphological criteria); COX2-expression were evaluated as positive (>median; 31/309 cases, 10%) or negative (≤median; 278/209 cases, 90%). Also the histological type, grade, age and adjuvant endocrine therapy were examined. We analyzed the clinic and morphological data of COX2-positive tumors, prognostic value for survival (relapses free- RFS, overall- OS and cancer specific- CSS) and predictable value for endocrine therapy. Results: COX2-positive tumor were associated with ductal histological type (p=0,018), PR-negative status (p=0,027) and high Ki67 (p<0,0001), but not correlated (p>0,05) with age, grade, ER, HER2 status or biological subtype. In women with ER-negative tumors (104 patients, 34,1%) COX2-expression did not associate with worse survival (p>0,05). In contrast to this, in patients with ER-positive tumors (201 women, 65,9%) COX2-expression strongly correlated with worse RFS in univariate (HR 2,829, 95% CI 1,366-5,860, p=0,005) and multivariate analyses (HR=2,972, 95% CI 1,190-7,423, p=0,02). The same value of COX2-expression in women with ER-positive tumors was found for CSS (univariate: HR 3,421, 95% CI 1,436-8,149, p=0,005; multivariate: HR 4,260, 95% CI 1,344-13,504, p=0,014), but not for OS (p>0,05). In women who did not receive adjuvant endocrine therapy (145 patients, 46%) COX2 expression did not have any prognostic value for RFS, OS and CSS (p>0,05) but in patients that used adjuvant endocrine therapy (170 women, 54%) COX2-expression strongly associated with worse cancer-specific survival (HR 5,614 95% CI 1,165-27,059, p=0,032), but not with RFS and OS (p>0,05). Conclusions: COX2 expression plays a role in hormonal pathways and sensitivity for endocrine therapy.