Lurbinectedin in patients with pretreated neuroendocrine tumours: Results from a phase II basket study

BACKGROUND

Patients with neuroendocrine tumours (NETs) need alternative therapies after failure of first-line therapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This phase II trial evaluated lurbinectedin, a selective inhibitor of oncogenic transcription, at 3.2 mg/m² as a 1-h intravenous infusion every 3 weeks in 32 NETs patients treated in the second- or third-line setting. The primary efficacy endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) according to RECIST v1.1 assessed by the investigators. Secondary endpoints included duration of response (DoR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and safety.

RESULTS

Two of 31 evaluable patients had confirmed partial responses (ORR = 6.5%; 95%CI, 0.8-21.4%). Median DoR was 4.7 months (95% CI, 4.0-5.4 months), median PFS was 1.4 months (95% CI, 1.2-3.0 months) and median OS was 7.4 months (95% CI, 3.4-16.2 months). Lurbinectedin showed an acceptable, predictable and manageable safety profile. The most common grade 3/4 toxicity was neutropenia (40.6%; grade 4, 12.4%; febrile neutropenia, 3.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

Considering the exploratory aim of this trial that evaluated a heterogeneous population of NETs patients, and the signs of antitumour activity observed (two confirmed partial responses and seven long disease stabilisations), further development of lurbinectedin is warranted in a more selected NETs population.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Sponsor Study Code: PM1183-B-005-14. EudraCT number: 2014-003773-42.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov reference: NCT02454972.

Early Clinical Experience with Trifluridine/Tipiracil for Refractory Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: The ROS Study

Simple Summary

Trifluridine/tipiracil is an oral combination therapy currently approved as a salvage-line treatment in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer refractory to, or not, candidates for available therapies. However, there is no consensus on the specific factors that should be considered to select patients who benefit the most from trifluridine/tipiracil in clinical practice. The aim of our retrospective cohort study was to assess the early clinical experience with trifluridine/tipiracil in Spain and identify potential survival markers. Our findings endorse the real-life efficacy and safety of trifluridine/tipiracil for refractory metastatic colorectal cancer, as well as revealing the presence of ≤2 metastatic sites, absence of liver metastasis, alkaline phosphatase levels < 300 IU, trifluridine/tipiracil dose reductions, and neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio < 5 as survival markers. Combinations of these markers may help physicians to identify subsets of patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer that may benefit the most from trifluridine/tipiracil in their daily practice.

Abstract

Trifluridine/tipiracil is currently approved for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) refractory to available therapies. However, there is no consensus on factors that predict treatment outcomes in daily practice. We assessed the early clinical experience with trifluridine/tipiracil in Spain and potential survival markers. This was a retrospective cohort study of mCRC patients who participated in the trifluridine/tipiracil early clinical experience programme in Spain. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Associations between OS and patient characteristics were assessed using multivariate Cox regression analyses. A total of 379 patients were included in the study. Trifluridine/tipiracil was administered for a median of 3.0 cycles and discontinued mainly due to disease progression (79.2%). The median OS was 7.9 months, with a 12-month OS rate of 30.5%. Cox analyses revealed that the following variables independently enhanced OS: ≤2 metastatic sites, no liver metastasis, alkaline phosphatase < 300 IU, trifluridine/tipiracil dose reductions, and neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio < 5. Grade ≥ 3 toxicities were reported in 141 (37.2%) patients, including mainly afebrile neutropaenia (23.2%), anaemia (12.1%), and thrombocytopaenia (5.3%). This study supports the real-life efficacy and safety of trifluridine/tipiracil for refractory mCRC and identifies tumour burden, liver metastasis, alkaline phosphatase, dose reductions, and neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio as survival markers.

Association of the Lung Immune Prognostic Index with Immunotherapy Outcomes in Mismatch Repair Deficient Tumors

Background: MSI-H/dMMR is considered the first predictive marker of efficacy for immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). However, around 39% of cases are refractory and additional biomarkers are needed. We explored the prognostic value of pretreatment LIPI in MSI-H/dMMR patients treated with ICIs, including identification of fast-progressors. Methods: A multicenter retrospective study of patients with metastatic MSI-H/dMMR tumors treated with ICIs between April 2014 and May 2019 was performed. LIPI was calculated based on dNLR > 3 and LDH > upper limit of normal. LIPI groups were good (zero factors), intermediate (one factor) and poor (two factors). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), including the fast-progressor rate (OS < 3 months). Results: A total of 151 patients were analyzed, mainly female (59%), with median age 64 years, performance status (PS) 0 (42%), and sporadic dMMR status (68%). ICIs were administered as first or second-line for 59%. The most frequent tumor types were gastrointestinal (66%) and gynecologic (22%). LIPI groups were good (47%), intermediate (43%), and poor (10%). The median follow-up was 32 months. One-year OS rates were 81.0%, 67.1%, and 21.4% for good, intermediate, and poor-risk groups (p < 0.0001). After adjustment for tumor site, metastatic sites and PS, LIPI remained independently associated with OS (HR, poor-LIPI: 3.50, 95%CI: 1.46-8.40, p = 0.02. Overall, the fast-progressor rate was 16.0%, and 35.7% with poor-LIPI vs. 7.5% in the good-LIPI group (p = 0.02). Conclusions: LIPI identifies dMMR patients who do not benefit from ICI treatment, particularly fast-progressors. LIPI should be included as a stratification factor for future trials.

Does Rapid Drug Desensitization to Chemotherapy Affect Survival Outcomes?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Hypersensitivity reactions to oxaliplatin may affect prognosis by jeopardizing the timely completion of scheduled treatment sessions or by forcing reactive patients into unexpected changes in therapy. Rapid drug desensitization (RDD) enables these patients to receive their first-choice treatments safely. However, the possible effects of RDD on the efficacy of oxaliplatin have never been studied. Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of RDD on survival rates in oxaliplatin-hypersensitive patients.

METHODS

We performed a 7-year retrospective study to compare survival between oxaliplatin-hypersensitive cases (patients receiving oxaliplatin by RDD) and nonallergic controls (patients receiving standard oxaliplatin infusions). The primary endpoint of this study was overall survival (OS) in cases and controls (Kaplan-Meier method with log-rank test comparisons).

RESULTS

OS was 23.7 months (95%CI, 15.3-30.9) for the 67 cases who underwent 337 RDDs, while for controls (n=143), OS was 34.5 months (95%CI, 21.7-55.5). There were no significant differences between the groups (HR, 1.42; 95%CI, 0.93-2.17; P =.104).

CONCLUSIONS

Survival outcomes of oxaliplatin-hypersensitive patients who received oxaliplatin via RDD did not differ significantly from those of control patients who received oxaliplatin via standard administration. Receiving oxaliplatin by means of RDD might be an effective therapeutic alternative for oxaliplatin-hypersensitive patients.

First-line panitumumab plus FOLFOX4 or FOLFIRI in colorectal cancer with multiple or unresectable liver metastases: A randomised, phase II trial (PLANET-TTD)

BACKGROUND

In first-line wild-type (WT)-Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homologue (KRAS) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), panitumumab (Pmab) improves outcomes when added to FOLFOX [folinic acid, 5-fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin] or FOLFIRI [folinic acid, 5-fluorouracil, and irinotecan]. However no trial has directly compared these combinations.

METHODS

Multicentre, open-label study in untreated patients ≥ 18 years with (WT)-KRAS mCRC and multiple or unresectable liver-limited disease (LLD) randomised to either Pmab-FOLFOX4 or Pmab-FOLFIRI. The primary end-point was objective response rate (ORR). Secondary end-points included liver metastases resection rate (R0 + R1), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), adverse events and perioperative safety. Exploratory end-points were: response by RAS status, early tumour shrinkage (ETS) and depth of response (DpR) in WT-RAS patients.

RESULTS

Data on 77 patients were analysed (38 Pmab-FOLFOX4; 39 Pmab-FOLFIRI; WT-RAS: 27/26, respectively). ORR was 74% with Pmab-FOLFOX4 and 67% with Pmab-FOLFIRI (WT-RAS: 78%/73%). Out of the above, 45% and 59% underwent surgical resection, respectively (WT-RAS: 37%/69%). The R0-R1 resection rate was 34%/46% (WT-RAS:26%/54%). Median PFS was 13/14 months (hazard ratio [HR] Pmab-FOLFIRI versus Pmab-FOLFOX4: 0.9; 95% confidence interval: [0.6-1.5]; WT-RAS:13/15; HR: 0.7 [0.4-1.3]). Median OS was 37/41 months (HR:1.0 [0.6-1.8]; WT-RAS: 39/49; HR:0.9 [0.4-1.9]). In WT-RAS patients with confirmed response, median DpR was 71%/66%, and 65%/77% of patients showed ETS ≥ 30%/ ≥ 20% at week 8, without significant differences between arms; these patients had longer median PFS and OS and higher resectability rates. Surgery was associated with longer survival. Perioperative and overall safety were similar, except for higher grade 3/4 neutropenia (40%/10%; p = 0.003) and neuropathy (13%/0%; p = 0.025) in the Pmab-FOLFOX4 arm.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with WT-KRAS mCRC and LLD, both first-line Pmab-FOLFOX4 and Pmab-FOLFIRI resulted in high ORR and ETS, allowing potentially curative resection. No significant differences in efficacy were observed between the two regimens. (clinicaltrials.gov:NCT00885885).

Efficacy of trifluridine and tipiracil (TAS-102) versus placebo, with supportive care, in a randomized, controlled trial of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer from Spain: results of a subgroup analysis of the phase 3 RECOURSE trial

Purpose

TAS-102 is a combination of the thymidine-based nucleoside analog trifluridine and the thymidine phosphorylase inhibitor tipiracil. Efficacy and safety of TAS-102 in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) refractory or intolerant to standard therapies were evaluated in the phase 3 RECOURSE trial. Results of RECOURSE demonstrated significant improvement in overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) with TAS-102 versus placebo [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.68 and 0.48 for OS and PFS, respectively; both P < 0.001]. The current analysis evaluates efficacy and safety of TAS-102 in the RECOURSE Spanish subgroup.

Methods

Primary and key secondary endpoints were evaluated in a post hoc analysis of the RECOURSE Spanish subgroup, using univariate and multivariate analyses. Safety and tolerability were reported with descriptive statistics.

Results

The RECOURSE Spanish subgroup included 112 patients (mean age 61 years, 62 % male). Median OS was 6.8 months in the TAS-102 group (n = 80) versus 4.6 months in the placebo group (n = 32) [HR = 0.47; 95 % confidence interval (CI): 0.28–0.78; P = 0.0032). Median PFS was 2.0 months in the TAS-102 group and 1.7 months in the placebo group (HR = 0.47; 95 % CI: 0.30–0.74; P = 0.001). Eighty (100 %) TAS-102 versus 31 (96.9 %) placebo patients had adverse events (AEs). The most common drug-related ≥Grade 3 AE was neutropenia (40 % TAS-102 versus 0 % placebo). There was 1 (1.3 %) case of febrile neutropenia in the TAS-102 group versus none in the placebo group.

Conclusions

In the RECOURSE Spanish subgroup, TAS-102 was associated with significantly improved OS and PFS versus placebo, consistent with the overall RECOURSE population. No new safety signals were identified.

ClinicalTrials.gov study number

NCT01607957