Phase III, randomised trial of avelumab versus physician's choice of chemotherapy as third-line treatment of patients with advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction cancer: primary analysis of JAVELIN Gastric 300

Background

There currently are no internationally recognised treatment guidelines for patients with advanced gastric cancer/gastro-oesophageal junction cancer (GC/GEJC) in whom two prior lines of therapy have failed. The randomised, phase III JAVELIN Gastric 300 trial compared avelumab versus physician’s choice of chemotherapy as third-line therapy in patients with advanced GC/GEJC.

Patients and methods

Patients with unresectable, recurrent, locally advanced, or metastatic GC/GEJC were recruited at 147 sites globally. All patients were randomised to receive either avelumab 10 mg/kg by intravenous infusion every 2 weeks or physician’s choice of chemotherapy (paclitaxel 80 mg/m² on days 1, 8, and 15 or irinotecan 150 mg/m² on days 1 and 15, each of a 4-week treatment cycle); patients ineligible for chemotherapy received best supportive care. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and safety.

Results

A total of 371 patients were randomised. The trial did not meet its primary end point of improving OS {median, 4.6 versus 5.0 months; hazard ratio (HR)=1.1 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.9–1.4]; P = 0.81} or the secondary end points of PFS [median, 1.4 versus 2.7 months; HR=1.73 (95% CI 1.4–2.2); P > 0.99] or ORR (2.2% versus 4.3%) in the avelumab versus chemotherapy arms, respectively. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) of any grade occurred in 90 patients (48.9%) and 131 patients (74.0%) in the avelumab and chemotherapy arms, respectively. Grade ≥3 TRAEs occurred in 17 patients (9.2%) in the avelumab arm and in 56 patients (31.6%) in the chemotherapy arm.

Conclusions

Treatment of patients with GC/GEJC with single-agent avelumab in the third-line setting did not result in an improvement in OS or PFS compared with chemotherapy. Avelumab showed a more manageable safety profile than chemotherapy.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02625623.

EORTC-1203-GITCG - the "INNOVATION"-trial: Effect of chemotherapy alone versus chemotherapy plus trastuzumab, versus chemotherapy plus trastuzumab plus pertuzumab, in the perioperative treatment of HER2 positive, gastric and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma on pathologic response rate: a randomized phase II-intergroup trial of the EORTC-Gastrointestinal Tract Cancer Group, Korean Cancer Study Group and Dutch Upper GI-Cancer group

Background

10–20% of patients with gastric cancer (GC) have HER2+ tumors. Addition of trastuzumab (T) to cisplatin/fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy (CT) improved survival in metastatic, HER2+ GC. When pertuzumab (P) was added to neoadjuvant T and CT, a significant increase in histopathological complete response rate was observed in HER2+ breast cancer. This study aims to investigate the added benefit of using both HER2 targeting drugs (T alone or the combination of T + P), in combination with perioperative CT for localized HER2+ GC.

Methods

This is a prospective, randomized, open-label, phase II trial. HER2 status from patients with resectable GC (UICC TNM7 tumor stage Ib-III) will be centrally determined. Two hundred and-fifteen patients from 52 sites in 14 countries will be centrally randomized (1:2:2 ratio) to one of the following treatment arms:

Standard: CT alone. CT regimens will be FLOT (5-FU, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, taxotere) CapOx (capecitabine, oxaliplatin) or FOLFOX (5-FU, leucovorin, oxaliplatin) according to investigator’s choice in Europe, and cisplatin/capecitabine in Asia.

Experimental arm 1: CT as in control group, plus T (8 mg/kg loading dose, followed by 6 mg/kg every 3 weeks) at day 1, independent of CT chosen for 3 cycles of 3 weeks before and after surgery.

Experimental arm 2: CT plus T as in experimental arm 1, plus P (840 mg every 3 weeks) on day 1.

Adjuvant treatment with T or T + P will continue for 17 cycles in total. Stratification factors are: histology (intestinal/non-intestinal); region (Asia vs Europe); location (GEJ vs non-GEJ); HER2 immunohistochemistry score (IHC 3+ vs IHC 2+/FISH+) and chemotherapy regimen. Primary objective is to detect an increase in the major pathological response rate from 25 to 45% either with CT plus T alone, or with CT plus the combination of T and P.

Discussion

Depending on the results of the INNOVATION trial, the addition of HER2 targeted treatment with either T or T and P to CT may inform future study designs or become a standard in the perioperative management HER2+ GC.

Trial registration

This article reports a health care intervention on human participants and was registered on July 10, 2014 under ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02205047; EudraCT: 2014–000722-38.

A randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled multicenter phase II trial of adjuvant immunotherapy with tecemotide (L-BLP25) after R0/R1 hepatic colorectal cancer metastasectomy (LICC): Final results

3537

Background: Hepatic metastasectomy is the only potential curative treatment option for stage IV colorectal cancer (CRC) limited to liver metastases (LM). After R0 resection of LM the high recurrence rate remains a major challenge. L-BLP25 is an antigen-specific cancer vaccine targeting mucin 1 (MUC1). The LICC trial aimed to improve survival outcome in mCRC patients (pts) after R0/R1 LM resection. Methods: This LICC trial, a binational, multicenter, double-blinded, placebo controlled phase II trial, included pts with stage IV LM limited CRC after resection of primary tumor and LM (R0/R1) within the last 8 weeks, ECOG 0/1 and adequate organ function. Pts were 2:1 randomized to receive L-BLP25 or placebo. L-BLP25 930 µg was administered as 8 weekly subcutaneous doses followed by 6 week maintenance intervals until recurrence or a maximum of 2 years. Cyclophosphamide 300 mg/m2 (CP) or matching saline (NS) was given intravenously 3 days prior to first L-BLP25/placebo. Co-primary endpoints were recurrence-free survival (RFS) and 3-year overall survival (OS), secondary endpoints were RFS and OS in subgroups with different MUC1 expression and safety. Differences in RFS and OS were analyzed with exploratory log-rank tests on the intention-to-treat population. Results: Of 121 pts enrolled between Oct 2011 and Dec 2014, 79 pts received L-BLP25+CP, 42 placebo+NS. Baseline characteristics were well balanced. Median age was 60 years. Median RFS was 6.1 (90% CI: 5.8-8.8) vs. 11.4 months (90% CI: 5.0-20.3) and estimated 3-year OS rate 69.1% vs. 79.1% for L-BLP25 and placebo, respectively. Two-factorial Cox regression models showed no impact of MUC1 expression or treatment on RFS or OS. The most common L-BLP25-related grade 3/4 adverse events were diarrhea, anemia and back pain. There was one death in the L-BLP25 arm due to Merkel cell carcinoma assessed by the investigator as being potentially related to vaccination. Conclusions: The LICC trial failed to meet its primary endpoint of significantly improving RFS and OS with L-BLP25. MUC1 expression was not associated with outcome. Clinical trial information: NCT01462513.

Survival after secondary liver resection in metastatic colorectal cancer: A comparative analysis of the LICC trial with historical controls (CELIM, FIRE-3)

e15025

Background: Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients (pts) with liver-limited disease (LLD) have a chance of long-term overall survival (OS) and potential cure after complete hepatic metastasectomy. The appropriate postoperative treatment strategy is still controversial. L-BLP25 as antigen-specific cancer vaccine targeting mucin 1 (MUC1) was recently evaluated as adjuvant therapy in mCRC pts after R0/R1 LLD resection (LICC trial, NCT01462513). Here we compared the LICC surveillance program and efficacy results for secondarily resected LLD pts versus historical controls, i.e. the CELIM trial (Folprecht et al, Ann Oncol 2014) of potentially resectable LLD mCRC pts and a FIRE-3-LLD subgroup (Holch et al, Int J Cancer 2018). Methods: LICC, CELIM and FIRE-3-LLD subgroup pts with stage IV mCRC limited to liver metastases who underwent hepatic resection (R0 or R1) were compared regarding pts characteristics, surveillance and efficacy outcome. LICC pts received adjuvant L-BLP25 or placebo after secondary LLD resection as 8 weekly doses, followed by 6 week maintenance intervals and tight surveillance until recurrence or a maximum of 2 years. Results: In LICC, 41 /121 pts (33.9%) were secondarily resected, and R0 resection was achieved in 31 pts (75.6%). In CELIM, 36/106 pts (34%) with primary unresectable LLD were secondarily R0 resected. In FIRE-3-LLD, secondary resection was feasible for 29/133 pts (21.8%). After R0 resection, median recurrence free survival (mRFS) was 8.9 months in LICC, 9.9 months in CELIM and 11.5/ 12.4 months in FIRE-3-LLD in either treatment arm. In the LICC trial, median overall survival (mOS) in secondarily resected pts was 65.1 months, with 38.3 months for the R1 and is not yet reached for the R0 subgroup. In CELIM, mOS was 53.9 months for R0 resected pts. In FIRE-3-LLD, after secondary resection mOS was 56.2 months. Median age was about 5 years less in LICC. Further details will be presented. Conclusions: Secondary resected pts of LICC, CELIM and FIRE-3 showed impressive median OS with better OS for LICC and a younger patient cohort. The established tight LICC surveillance program after surgery might have had a positive impact on survival. Clinical trial information: LICC: NCT01462513; FIRE-3: NCT00433927; CELIM: NCT00153998.

Survival after primary liver resection in metastatic colorectal cancer: A comparative analysis of the LICC trial with historical controls (FFCD ACHBTH AURC 9002 trial and EORTC Intergroup trial 40983)

e15019

Background: Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients (pts) with liver-limited disease (LLD) have a chance of long-term survival and cure after hepatic metastasectomy. The optimal treatment after primary liver resection remains controversial. Here we compare results from the LICC trial with historical controls, the FFCD ACHBTH AURC 9002 trial (FFCD; Portier et al., 2006) and the EORTC Intergroup trial 40983 (EORTC; Nordlinger et al., 2008, 2013). The three trials investigated pts with mCRC LLD who underwent primary hepatic resection. Methods: LICC, FFCD and EORTC were compared regarding pts characteristics, treatment, surveillance and efficacy outcomes. LICC pts received the adjuvant antigen-specific cancer vaccine tecemotide (L-BLP25) or placebo after primary LLD resection for up to 2 years. The FFCD trial compared postoperative 5-FU/leucovorin and the EORTC trial perioperative FOLFOX versus surgery alone. Results: Primary resected pts in LICC (n = 80; R0 n = 76), FFCD (R0 n = 171; postoperative chemotherapy n = 86) and EORTC (n = 364) showed different pt characteristics concerning median age (60, 63 and 63 years) and rate of synchronous metastases (46.8%, 27.9% and 34.0%). In LICC, > 5 liver metastases were resected in 11.6% of pts, in FFCD and EORTC all eligible pts had < 5 liver metastases resected. In contrast to EORTC, LICC and FFCD had a close surveillance until recurrence or a maximum of 2 years. Median OS (mOS) in LICC was not yet estimable in primary resected pts (tecemotide arm: 62.8 months; placebo arm: not yet estimable). In the FFCD and the EORTC trial, mOS was 62.1 and 61.3 months, respectively. Further details will be presented. Conclusions: Despite unfavorable disease characteristic in LICC compared with the earlier EORTC and FFCD studies, primary liver resection without adjuvant chemotherapy led to surprisingly good survival outcomes. Improvements in imaging-based pt selection and liver resection techniques might in part explain our finding. Surgery alone appears to be an option for selected pts with resectable LLD. Better systemic chemo(immune-)therapy may have also contributed to the OS benefit. Clinical trial information: LICC: NCT01462513; EORTC: NCT00006479; FFCD: not registered.

A phase III trial-in-progress comparing tislelizumab plus chemotherapy with placebo plus chemotherapy as first-line therapy in patients with locally advanced unresectable or metastatic gastric or gastroesophageal junction (G/GEJ) adenocarcinoma

TPS2655

Background: In patients (pts) with locally advanced or metastatic G/GEJ cancer, fluoropyrimidine- and platinum (plt)-based combination chemotherapy is first-line standard of care. Despite improvement in chemotherapy regimens, outcomes are poor and survival remains low. Tislelizumab, an investigational anti-PD-1 antibody, was engineered to minimize binding of FcγR on macrophages in order to abrogate antibody-dependent phagocytosis, a mechanism of T-cell clearance and potential resistance to anti-PD-1 therapy. Previous reports suggested tislelizumab, as a single agent and in combination with chemotherapy, was generally well tolerated and had antitumor activity in pts with advanced solid tumors, including G/GEJ cancer. Methods: This global, double-blind, randomized, phase 3 study (NCT03777657) is designed to compare plt/fluoropyrimidine + tislelizumab versus plt/fluoropyrimidine + placebo as first-line therapy for pts with locally advanced or metastatic G/GEJ cancer. Approximately 720 pts from 160 centers will be randomized 1:1 to receive tislelizumab (200 mg IV Q3W) or placebo (IV Q3W) in combination with chemotherapy. Oxaliplatin (130 mg/m² IV Q3W) plus capecitabine (1000 mg/m2 orally twice daily for 2 weeks) or cisplatin (80 mg/m² IV Q3W) plus 5-fluorouracil (800 mg/m2/day IV on Days 1–5 Q3W) will be used as backbone chemotherapy on an individual basis. Chemotherapy will be administered for up to 6 cycles; capecitabine maintenance therapy is optional for pts who received capecitabine and oxaliplatin. PD-L1 expression will be assessed using the VENTANA PD-L1 (SP263) assay. Progression-free survival and overall survival are primary endpoints in the intent-to-treat and PD-L1-positive analysis sets of the study. Secondary endpoints include overall response rate, duration of response, quality-of-life outcomes, and the safety/tolerability profile of combination therapy. Exploratory endpoints include disease control rate, time to response, and an analysis of potential predictive biomarkers including, but not limited to, PD-L1 expression. Clinical trial information: NCT03777657.

Survival after secondary liver resection in metastatic colorectal cancer: A comparative analysis of the LICC trial with historical controls (CELIM, FIRE-3)

571

Background: Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients (pts) with liver-limited disease (LLD) have a chance of long-term overall survival (OS) and potential cure after complete hepatic metastasectomy. The appropriate postoperative treatment strategy is still controversial. L-BLP25 as antigen-specific cancer vaccine targeting mucin 1 (MUC1) was recently evaluated as adjuvant therapy in mCRC pts after R0/R1 LLD resection (LICC trial, NCT01462513). Here we compared the LICC surveillance program and efficacy results for secondarily resected LLD pts versus historical controls, i.e. the CELIM trial (Folprecht et al, Ann Oncol 2014) of potentially resectable LLD mCRC pts and a FIRE-3-LLD subgroup (Holch et al, Int J Cancer 2018). Methods: LICC, CELIM and FIRE-3-LLD subgroup pts with stage IV mCRC limited to liver metastases who underwent hepatic resection (R0 or R1) were compared regarding pts characteristics, surveillance and efficacy outcome. LICC pts received adjuvant L-BLP25 or placebo after secondary LLD resection as 8 weekly doses, followed by 6 week maintenance intervals and tight surveillance until recurrence or a maximum of 2 years. Results: In LICC, 41/121 pts (33.9%) were secondarily resected, and R0 resection was achieved in 31 pts (75.6%). In CELIM, 36/106 pts (34%) with primary unresectable LLD were secondarily R0 resected. In FIRE-3-LLD, secondary resection was feasible for 29/133 pts (21.8%). After R0 resection, median recurrence free survival (mRFS) was 8.9 months in LICC, 9.9 months in CELIM and 11.5/12.4 months in FIRE-3-LLD in either treatment arm. In the LICC trial, median overall survival (mOS) in secondarily resected pts was 65.1 months, with 38.3 months for the R1 and is not yet reached for the R0 subgroup. In CELIM, mOS was 53.9 months for R0 resected pts. In FIRE-3-LLD, after secondary resection mOS was 56.2 months. Median age was about 5 years less in LICC. Further details will be presented. Conclusions: Secondary resected pts of LICC, CELIM and FIRE-3 showed impressive median OS with better OS for LICC and a younger patient cohort. The established tight LICC surveillance program after surgery might have had a positive impact on survival. Clinical trial information: LICC: NCT01462513; FIRE-3: NCT00433927; CELIM: NCT00153998.

A randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled multicenter phase II trial of adjuvant immunotherapy with tecemotide (L-BLP25) after R0/R1 hepatic colorectal cancer metastasectomy (LICC): Final results

480

Background: Hepatic metastasectomy is the only potential curative treatment option for stage IV colorectal cancer (CRC) limited to liver metastases (LM). After R0 resection of LM the high recurrence rate remains a major challenge. L-BLP25 is an antigen-specific cancer vaccine targeting mucin 1 (MUC1). The LICC trial aimed to improve survival outcome in mCRC patients (pts) after R0/R1 LM resection. Methods: This LICC trial, a binational, multicenter, double-blinded, placebo controlled phase II trial, included pts with stage IV LM limited CRC after resection of primary tumor and LM (R0/R1) within the last 8 weeks, ECOG 0/1 and adequate organ function. Pts were 2:1 randomized to receive L-BLP25 or placebo. L-BLP25 930 µg was administered as 8 weekly subcutaneous doses followed by 6 week maintenance intervals until recurrence or a maximum of 2 years. Cyclophosphamide 300 mg/m2 (CP) or matching saline (NS) was given intravenously 3 days prior to first L-BLP25/placebo. Co-primary endpoints were recurrence-free survival (RFS) and 3-year overall survival (OS), secondary endpoints were RFS and OS in subgroups with different MUC1 expression and safety. Differences in RFS and OS were analyzed with exploratory log-rank tests on the intention-to-treat population. Results: Of 121 pts enrolled between Oct 2011 and Dec 2014, 79 pts received L-BLP25+CP, 42 placebo+NS. Baseline characteristics were well balanced. Median age was 60 years. Median RFS was 6.1 (90% CI: 5.8-8.8) vs. 11.4 months (90% CI: 5.0-20.3) and estimated 3-year OS rate 69.1% vs. 79.1% for L-BLP25 and placebo, respectively. Two-factorial Cox regression models showed no impact of MUC1 expression or treatment on RFS or OS. The most common L-BLP25-related grade 3/4 adverse events were diarrhea, anemia and back pain. There was one death in the L-BLP25 arm due to Merkel cell carcinoma assessed by the investigator as being potentially related to vaccination. Conclusions: The LICC trial failed to meet its primary endpoint of significantly improving RFS and OS with L-BLP25. MUC1 expression was not associated with outcome. Clinical trial information: NCT01462513 . Clinical trial information: NCT01462513.

FOENIX-101: A phase II trial of TAS-120 in patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma harboring FGFR2 gene rearrangements

TPS468

Background: Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) is a cancer arising from the intrahepatic bile duct. Standard treatment of unresectable, recurrent, or metastatic iCCA is with cytotoxic chemotherapy. FGFR2 gene fusions have been identified as oncogenic drivers in 10–20% of iCCA tumors, but no targeted agents have been established to date. TAS-120 is an investigational irreversible FGFR1–4 inhibitor in development as a once-daily oral treatment for iCCA. Based on initial studies in multiple tumor types expressing FGFR abnormalities, iCCA was identified as a tumor type with potential susceptibility to FGFR inhibition and high unmet need. A phase I portion of the trial with an iCCA expansion cohort demonstrated tolerability and preliminary evidence of clinical efficacy with TAS-120 as a continuous, once-daily oral treatment in patients with iCCA. The most common AEs in the phase I portion of the trial were hyperphosphatemia, a mechanism-based on-target side effect, cutaneous AEs, and gastrointestinal AEs. The phase I portion of the study is continuing to enroll, and final results are anticipated in early 2019. Based on preliminary findings, a phase II portion of the study (FOENIX-101; clinicaltrials.gov registration NCT02052778) has been initiated. Methods: The phase II portion of the trial is a global, single-arm study of TAS-120 in patients with iCCA harboring FGFR2 gene rearrangements. The study will enroll approximately 100 adult patients with locally advanced or metastatic iCCA that progressed after ≥ 1 systemic therapies and with an ECOG PS of 0 or 1. Prior systemic therapy must include gemcitabine plus platinum-based chemotherapy. Screening for FGFR2 gene rearrangements will be performed at a central laboratory. The primary endpoint is objective response rate based on RECIST v1.1. Secondary endpoints include duration of response, disease control rate, overall survival, progression-free survival, safety, and health-related quality of life. Clinical trial information: NCT02052778.

A phase I, dose-finding study of orally administered S-1 in combination with epirubicin and oxaliplatin (EOS) in patients (pts) with advanced or metastatic gastrointestinal cancer (AGIC) and chemonaïve advanced esophagogastric cancer (AEGC)

140

Background: S-1 (Teysuno), an oral fluoropyrimidine registered in Europe since 2011, provides a good efficacy and safety profile for the treatment (trt) of AEGC in combination with cisplatin. (FLAGS Study; J.A. Ajani. EJC2013). Because triplets with platinum compounds and anthracyclines are commonly used in AEGC, a phase I evaluating S-1 with fixed doses of oxaliplatin (130 mg/m² D1) and epirubicin (50 mg/m² D1) q3w in AGIC pts [cohorts 1 (C1) and 2 (C2)] and in chemonaïve AEGC pts [cohort 3 (C3)] was performed. Methods: Pts >18 years, ECOG/PS 0/1 were enrolled. Standard dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) evaluation was used. The maximum tolerate dose (MTD) was defined as the highest dose level at which less than <2/6 of pts experienced a DLT during Cycle 1. Once MTD was established, the cohort was expanded up to 12 pts. C1 and C2: S-1 dose was defined in cohort of pts (3+3 design): C1 20mg/m² BID (40 mg/m²/day); C2 25 mg/m² BID (50 mg/m²/d). Escalation to dose level (DL) 2 occurred only after DL1 (20mg/m²/BID) was safe according to DLT criteria. In C3 pts received S-1 25mg/m² BID. Results: 23 pts were evaluated. C1 and C2 included AGIC pts at all lines of trt. As in C1: 3 pts had no DLT, dose was increased and 3 pts were included in C2: after 1 DLT (≥Gr3 non-hematological toxicity), 2 more pts were included in C2 with a second DLT (febrile neutropenia). These 2 DLTs occurred in heavily pre-treated pts (3rd line) and led to closing of C2 and 3 additional pts were enrolled in expanded C1. MTD of S-1 was established 20 mg/m² BID. No DLT reported for chemo-naïve pts treated. Since EOS is used to treat AEGC in first line, a new C3 cohort with chemo-naïve pts was opened to again determine MTD of S-1: 6 pts in C3 were included. Here no DLT occurred and additional 6 pts confirmed dose of 25 mg/m² as the MTD. Conclusions: Based on these results, the recommended doses of S-1 in EOS regimen are 20 mg/m²/BID in heavily pre-treated AGIC pts and 25 mg/m²/BID in chemo-naïve AEGC pts. The triplets EOS could represent a well-tolerated alternative first line trt for AEGC pts. Clinical trial information: 2011-003471-11.

Influence of adjuvant pretreatment on outcome of FIRE-3 (AIO KRK-0306): A randomized phase III study of FOLFIRI plus cetuximab or bevacizumab as first-line treatment for wild-type (WT) KRAS (exon 2) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients

515

Background: The FIRE-3 study (AIO KRK-0306) was designed to compare the efficacy of FOLFIRI + cetuximab (cet) to FOLFIRI + bevacizumab (bev) as first-line treatment in KRAS WT mCRC patients. FOLFIRI plus cet resulted in comparable overall response rates (ORR) and progression free survival (PFS) when compared to FOLFIRI + bev. Overall survival (OS) was significantly longer in the FOLFIRI + cet arm. Methods: In an exploratory subgroup analysis, patients pretreated with adjuvant chemotherapy were analyzed by Fisher's exact and log rank-test according to tumor response (ORR) and survival data. Patients of the ITT (n=592) and the final RAS wild-type population (n=400) were investigated. Results: See table. Conclusions: Results in patients treated with any adjuvant chemotherapy mirrored those in the whole study population. In adjuvant pretreated RASwt patients a significantly higher ORR was reached in the cet arm when compared to the bev arm (p=0.01). The role of adjuvant treatment on efficacy of first-line therapy remains to be further evaluated. Clinical trial information: NCT00433927. [Table: see text] [Table: see text]

Lapatinib combined with ECF/x as first-line metastatic gastric cancer (GC) according to HER2 and EGFR status: A randomized placebo controlled phase II (EORTC 40071)

80

Background: ECF/X (epirubicin (E) + cisplatin (C) + 5-fluoruracil (F) or capecitabine (X)) is a reference chemotherapy (CT) regimen in metastatic GC. Trastuzumab with CF/X prolonged survival (OS) of metastatic HER2+ gastric or esophagogastric junction cancer (GC) patients (pts). Lapatinib (LAP) inhibits both, EGFR1 and HER2, and showed activity in phase II GC trials. This double-blind Phase II study prospectively addressed efficacy and safety of LAP with ECF/X in GC pts with discordant FISH or IHC HER2 status or EGFR1+. Methods: Pts without prior palliative CT, screened centrally for HER2/EGFR1 (by FISH and IHC) were enrolled into 3 strata: 1) HER2 FISH+ and IHC 2/3+, 2) HER2 FISH- and IHC 2/3+, or 3) HER2 IHC 0/+ and EGFR1 FISH+ or IHC 2/3+. Pts without HER2 + or EGFR1+, by FISH or IHC, were excluded. Pts were randomized to LAP 1250mg (arm 1) or placebo (arm 2), with ECF or ECX (investigator-selected) for 6 cycles. Primary endpoint was progression free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints were toxicity, response rates, OS, HER2 concordance and correlation of HER2/EGFR. Results: The trial was prematurely closed to patient accrual given the LOGIC trial results at ASCO 2013. A total of 69 pts were tested in central lab of whom 9 (13%), 5 (7.2%) and 25 (36.2%) were in stratum 1, 2 and 3. Of these, 28 patients (6/4/18) were randomized (14 in arm 1, 14 in arm 2) and followed up. Due to the low number of pts accrued, no formal statistical tests were carried out. No safety concerns were found in arm 1. No complete responses were seen. 6 pts had partial responses in arm 1 vs. 3 pts in arm 2. Median PFS was 7.1 months in arm 1 vs. 5.9 months in arm 2 (HR=0.94, 95% CI: 0.41-2.14) for all pts, and 6.2 months in arm 1 vs. 6.3 months in arm 2 (HR=0.99, 95% CI: 0.36-2.75) for stratum 3 pts, respectively. Median overall survival was 13.8 months in arm 1 vs. 10.1 months in arm 2 (HR=0.90, 95% CI: 0.35-2.27) for all pts. Conclusions: Lapatinib with ECF/X did not show appealing activity in EGFR+ metastatic GC patients in this small phase 2 trial. The combination was well tolerated. Clinical trial information: NCT01123473.

FOLFIRI plus sunitinib versus FOLFIRI alone in advanced chemorefractory esophagogastric cancer patients: A randomized placebo-controlled multicentric AIO phase II trial

4086

Background: Sunitinib is an receptor tyrosine kinase (RTK) inhibitor of VEGFR1-3, PDGFR-α-β, and other RTK. After we established Sunitinib (Sun) alone associated with limited response rate (RR) and good tolerability in refractory advanced esophagogastric cancer patients (Moehler et al. EUR J Cancer. 2011, 47: 1511), this double-blinded placebo-controlled phase II evaluated safety and efficacy of SUN as add-on in second-line or third-line FOLFIRI (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01020630). Methods: Patients with failure of any prior docetaxel and/or platinum-based chemotherapy were randomized to receive 6-week cycles including FOLFIRI two weekly and SUN (25 mg) versus (vs) placebo (PLA) daily for 4 consecutive weeks followed by a 2-week rest. Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Results: 91 randomized patients (ITT) had similar characteristics in both groups (SUN/PLA 45/46). Both groups had 2.7 treatment cycles. Objective RR was 20/29%, and tumor control rate was 58/56 % for SUN/PLA, respectively. Median PFS was similar for SUN vs. PLA with 3.6 vs. 3.3 months, respectively (HR 1.11; 95%CI 0.70-1.74, P = 0.66). Median overall survival (OS) was longer for SUN vs. PLA with 10.5 vs. 9.0 months, in ITT (HR 0.816; 95%CI 0.50 - 1.34, P = 0.42, one-sided 0.21) and in the per protocol population (HR 0.71; 95%CI 0.41 - 1.24, P = 0.23) respectively. No unexpected higher toxicities, SAE or SUSAR occurred with SUN. For SUN/PLA, all grade AEs (%) possibly related to study drug were nausea 49/47%, fatigue 36/29%, vomiting 27/29%, diarrhoea 36/38%, neutropenia 62/22%, stomatitis 27/20%, and palmar-plantar erythrodysaesthesia 13/3%, and Grade 3+ AEs (%) were neutropenia 56/20%, diarrhoea 2/13%, nausea 7/7%, fatigue 0/9% and pain 0/9%, respectively. Performed quality of life outcomes were mostly in favor of Sunitinib. Conclusions: In our phase II trial, Sunitinib added to FOLFIRI increased hematotoxicity and did not improve response rates or PFS in chemotherapy-resistant GC patients. Since the regimen was safe and patients had a trend to better OS, biomarker analyses will be performed to identify subgroups that benefit from add-on Sunitinib. Clinical trial information: NCT01020630.

POWER: An open-label, randomized phase III trial of cisplatin and 5-FU with or without panitumumab (P) for patients (pts) with nonresectable, advanced, or metastatic esophageal squamous cell cancer (ESCC)

TPS4158

Background: More than 50% of pts with esophageal cancer have locally advanced or metastatic disease at the time of initial diagnosis. For this group chemotherapy is increasingly used intending local and distant tumor control, improvement of quality of life (QoL) and longer survival. Previous data suggested that EGFR-targeting antibodies may be safely combined with cisplatin and 5-FU, and in addition may increase the efficacy of the standard cisplatin/5-FU regimen [Lorenzen et al, Ann Oncol2009; 20(10): 1667-1673]. Methods: In this open-label, randomized (1:1), multicenter, multinational phase III trial pts with nonresectable, advanced or metastatic ESCC, not eligible for definitive radiochemotherapy, are included. Pts have measurable or non-measurable disease according to RECIST 1.1 and an ECOG PS 0-1. Previous chemotherapy of ESCC in the metastatic setting, concurrent radiotherapy involving target lesions and previous exposure to EGFR-targeted therapy are excluded. Pts receive either CTX (cisplatin 100 mg/m² on day 1 and 5-FU 1000 mg/m²/d on day 1-4) or CTX + P (9 mg/kg on day 1). Cycles are repeated every 3 weeks until progression of disease. Tumor assessment is performed every 9 weeks. The primary objective is to demonstrate superiority of CTX + P over CTX alone in terms of overall survival. Secondary endpoints are progression-free survival, 1-year survival, response rate, safety and tolerability, and QoL. A translational analysis in tumor tissue and serum samples is included. 300 pts are planned to be enrolled for a power of 90% to reject the null hypothesis in which the median overall survival in the control and experimental groups are 6 and 9 months, respectively. 18 pts have been enrolled to date. A Data Monitoring Board will review safety data after 40, 100 and 200 pts. The clinical trial registry number is NCT1627379. Clinical trial information: NCT01627379.

Sequential ipilimumab (Ipi) versus best supportive care (BSC) following first-line chemotherapy (Ctx) in patients (pts) with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic gastric or gastro-esophageal junction (GEJ) cancer: A randomized, open-label, two-arm, phase II trial (CA184-162) of immunotherapy as a maintenance concept

TPS4151

Background: First-line systemic CTX is standard-of-care for advanced gastric cancer. However, most pts relapse or have severe adverse events (AEs), creating a need for new therapies with better benefit/risk and toxicity profiles. Endogenous immune activity against tumor cells has been demonstrated in the human gastric cancer tumor microenvironment, supporting a role for immunotherapy. As a new maintenance concept, sequential administration of immunotherapy may prolong clinical benefit of first-line CTX before disease progression (PD). Ipi, a fully human monoclonal antibody which binds CTLA-4, augments the antitumor immune response. Ipi improved overall survival (OS) in patients with advanced melanoma with AEs managed using product-specific treatment guidelines.This global (32 sites among 10 countries), multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase II trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01585987) will compare the efficacy of Ipi and BSC after first-line CTX. Methods: Pts with good performance status (0 or 1) and histologically confirmed, unresectable locally advanced or metastatic gastric or GEJ cancer without PD after first-line CTX with a fluoropyrimidine (F) and platinum (P) doublet will be eligible. Pts with radiological evidence of brain metastases, autoimmune/immune-mediated disease, inadequate hematologic, renal, and hepatic function, or are HER2+ will be ineligible. Pts will be randomized to Ipi (4 doses [10 mg/kg, IV Q3W], followed by Q12W) until confirmed immune-related PD or unacceptable toxicity, or to BSC (continuing F used in lead-in CTX or no active systemic therapy). The primary objective is to compare immune-related progression-free survival (PFS): immune-related response criteria were derived from World Health Organization (WHO) criteria to better capture Ipi response patterns. Secondary objectives are to compare PFS per mWHO criteria and OS, and estimate immune-related best overall response rate. The study is planned to randomize 114 pts. Clinical trial information: NCT01585987.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter, multinational, phase II trial immunotherapy with L-BLP25 (tecemotide) in patients with colorectal carcinoma following R0/R1 hepatic metastasectomy

TPS3124^

Background: 15-20% of all patients (pts) diagnosed with colorectal cancer (crc) develop metastases (mets) surgical resection remains the only potentially curative treatment available. Current 5-year survival rate following R0 resection of liver mets lies between 28-39%, recurrence occurs in up to 70% of pts. To date, adjuvant chemotherapy has not significantly improved clinical outcomes. The primary objective of the ongoing LICC trial (L-BLP25 In Colorectal Cancer) is to determine whether L-BLP25, an active MUC1-specific cancer immunotherapy, extends recurrence-free survival (RFS) time over placebo in crc pts following R0/R1 resection of liver mets known to highly express MUC1 glycoprotein. Phase III data from L-BLP25 in NSCLC will be reported at this meeting. Methods: This is a multinational, phase II, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with a sample size of 159 pts from 20 centers in 3 countries. Pts must have stage IV cr adenocarcinoma limited to liver mets. Following curative-intent complete resection of the primary tumor and of all synchronous/metachronous mets, eligible pts are randomized 2:1 to receive either L-BLP25 or placebo. L-BLP25 arm receives a single dose of 300 mg/m2 cyclophosphamide (CPA) 3 d before 1st L-BLP25 dose, then primary treatment with sc L-BLP25 930 μg weekly for 8 weeks, followed by sc L-BLP25 930 μg maintenance doses at 6-week (year 1 and 2) and 12-week (year 3) intervals until recurrence. Control arm: CPA is replaced by saline solution and L-BLP25 by placebo. Primary endpoint (PE) is RFS time. Secondary endpoints: Overall survival (OS), safety, tolerance, RFS/OS in MUC-1 positive cancers. Exploratory immune response analyses are planned. Study start was in Q3 2011. 19 centers were initialized and 36 patients recruited, no SUSARs occurred. Study recruitment will end Q3 2013: follow-up until Q3 2017. PE assessment is in Q3 2016. Interim analyses are not planned.No major practical issues were identified during setup and early conduct of the study. Clinical trial information: 2011-000218-20.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter, multinational, phase II trial of L-BLP25 in patients with colorectal carcinoma following R0/R1 hepatic metastasectomy

TPS3641^

Background: Approximately 15-20% of patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer (crc) develop metastatic disease. Surgical resection remains the only potentially curative treatment. 5-year survival following R0-resection of liver metastases lies ~28 -39%. Recurrence occurs in ~70% of pts. Adjuvant chemotherapy has not significantly improved clinical outcomes. The primary objective of the LICC trial (L-BLP25 in Colorectal Cancer) is to analyze whether L-BLP25, an active cancer immunotherapy, extends recurrence-free survival (RFS) time over placebo in colorectal cancer pts following R0/R1 resection of hepatic metastases. L-BLP25 targets MUC1 glycoprotein, which is highly expressed in hepatic metastases from crc. In a phase IIB trial, L-BLP25 showed acceptable tolerability and a trend toward longer survival in pts with stage IIIB NSCLC. Methods: This is a multinational, phase II, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with a sample size of 159 pts from 20 centers in 3 countries. Pts must have stage IV cr adenocarcinoma limited to liver metastases. Following complete resection of the primary tumor and all syn-/metachronous metastases, eligible pts are randomized 2:1 to receive either L-BLP25 or placebo. Those allocated to L-BLP25 receive a single dose of 300 mg/m2 cyclophosphamide (CP) 3 days before first L-BLP25 dose, then primary treatment with sc L-BLP25 930 μg once weekly for 8 weeks, followed by maintenance doses at 6-week (years 1 and 2) and 12-week (year 3) intervals until recurrence. In the control arm, CP is replaced by saline solution and L-BLP25 by placebo. Primary endpoint: RFS time. Secondary endpoints: OS time, safety status, tolerability, RFS/OS in MUC-1 positive cancers. Exploratory immune response analyses are planned. First recruitment was of Q3 2011. To date, 8 of 20 centers are initiated and 4 pts recruited. Completion of recruitment is scheduled for Q3 2013. Primary endpoint will be assessed in Q3 2016: Follow-up will end Q3 2017. No interim analysis is planned. Design and implementation of this vaccination study in colorectal cancer is feasible. No major issues identified during setup of the study.

PaFLO: Pazopanib with 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FLO) as first-line treatment in advanced gastric cancer: A randomized phase II study of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft internistische Onkologie (AIO)

TPS4138

Background: VEGF inhibition in gastric cancer shows promising improvement of remission rate and progression-free survival (Ohtsu et al., JCO 2011). Pazopanib is an orally available tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) selectively inhibiting VEGFR-1, -2, -3, c-kit and PDGFR. It is approved for treating renal cell cancer. A phase-I trial showed good tolerability of pazopanib with full-dose FOLFOX in solid tumors (Brady et al., ASCO, 2009). FLO is a widely used combination for advanced gastric cancer recommended in national guidelines. Methods: 75 Patients with HER-2-negative locally advanced or metastatic adenocarcinoma of the stomach or the gastro-esophageal junction will be randomized in a 2:1 ratio to A: FLO (F 2600mg/m2 as 24h infusion, L 200mg/m2, O 85 mg/m2) d1 + pazopanib (800mg) d1-14 and B: FLO; repeated for 12 2-week cycles, followed by a maintenance therapy with pazopanib alone in A and an observation period in B until disease progression. Primary endpoint is progression-free survival rate (PFSR) at 6 months, secondary endpoints are PFSR at 9 and 12 months, median PFS, response rate, duration of response, toxicity, tolerability and overall survival. Additionally, we evaluate the predictive and prognostic relevance of PIGF, VEGF, and the respective soluble receptors sVEGFR1 and sVEGFR2 as biomarkers for clinicopathological parameters, clinical response to treatment and tumor volume change. Based on a phase-III trial demonstrating a 6-month PFSR of 44% with FLO (Al-Batran et al., 2008), we estimate a 6-month PFSR of 55% in the experimental group. Given an alpha error of 0.1 and a beta error of 0.2 in a Simon 2-stage minimax design, in the first stage ≥12 of 30 patients need to be progression free at 6 months to continue and after the second stage ≥25 of 50 patients should be progression free at 6 months to justify further evaluation. Randomization is performed to estimate selection bias according to pazopanib-specific exclusion criteria for comparison with historical data. Study protocol received ethics committee approval in November 2011 and is currently recruiting patients in 15 AIO centers.

A prospective trial for defining a subset of patients with limited metastatic gastric cancer who may be candidates for bimodal treatment strategies: FLOT3

4090

Background: The utility of surgery for metastatic gastric cancer is debated. A prospective trial was performed to evaluate a prognostic model for selecting patients (pts) treated with systemic chemotherapy (ct) who may also be candidates for surgical intervention. Methods: Using a predefined algorithm pts with untreated gastric cancer were prospectively stratified into 3 groups: operable (OD), limited metastatic (LD), or extensive metastatic (ED) disease and treated with 5-FU, oxaliplatin, leucovorin and docetaxel (FLOT). LD was defined as: distant intra-abdominal lymph node metastases only or/and a maximum of 1 organ involved, normal serum alkaline phosphatase, < 5 liver lesions, no visible carcinomatosis (peritoneum or pleura), and ECOG ≤ 1. All other metastatic pts were ED. Pts with OD received 4 preoperative ct cycles followed by surgery and 4 postoperative cycles. Pts with LD received 8 cycles with surgery allowed for complete macroscopic resection. Pts with ED received 8 cycles with surgery allowed for palliation only. The study had 80% power to detect a HR of 0.55 for overall survival in favor of the LD group (vs. ED group; 2-sided log-rank p=0.05). Results: 238 of 252 pts included were eligible (OD/LD/ED: 51/60/127). LD pts had distant lymph nodes only (41%), liver (22%), lung (17%), localized peritoneal involvement (7%), or others (13%). A median of 8 ct cycles was applied to all groups. Median OS was 22.9 vs. 10.7 months in pts with LD vs. ED, respectively (HR 0.37; 95% CI, 0.25 – 0.56; p <0.001). LD was the strongest predictor of OS in the multivariate analysis including all single determinants of LD status (p=.002). Surgical resection was conducted in 96%, 62%, and 12% in the OD, LD, and ED groups, of which R0 resection (primary) was achieved in 82%, 81% and 33%, respectively. Within the LD arm, operated pts had better outcome than non-operated pts (median OS 31.3 vs. 15.9 months; p=.004) and pts with lymph node only involvement had best outcome. Conclusions: This clinical model identifies a subset of pts with (limited) metastatic gastric cancer who have a favorable outcome and who may be candidates for bi-modal treatment strategies.

Lapatinib in combination with ECF/x in EGFR1 positive first-line metastatic gastric cancer (GC): A phase II randomized placebo controlled trial (EORTC 40071)

TPS4140

Background: Survival of HER2+ metastatic GC is prolonged by trastuzumab when administered with CF/X (VanCutsem, ASCO 2009). Lapatinib inhibits both EGFR1 and HER2, is active in HER2+ GC lines, and has shown clinical activity in uncontrolled phase II GC trials. A phase III trial of lapatinib with X + oxaliplatin in HER2+ (FISH) GC is closed to recruitment. Additional unaddressed questions include the efficacy and safety of lapatinib with ECF/X (epirubicin + cisplatin + 5-FU or capecitabine (X), which is a preferred chemotherapy (CT) regimen in GC), and its activity in patients (pts) with discordant FISH or IHC HER2 status or EGFR1+. Methods: This is a phase II, randomized, double- blind, placebo controlled, multicenter trial sponsored by the EORTC. About 480 pts with adenocarcinoma of the stomach or esophagogastric junction not amenable to curative surgery and without prior palliative CT are screened centrally for HER2/EGFR1 by FISH and IHC. Patients are enrolled into one of two strata: 1) HER2 FISH- and IHC 2/3+, or 2) HER2 IHC 0/+ and EGFR1 FISH+ or IHC 2/3+. Pts HER2 FISH+/IHC 2/3+ and pts without HER2/EGFR1 by FISH/IHC will be excluded. 168 pts are anticipated to be randomized to lapatinib 1,250 mg cont. until progression or placebo, administered 6 cycles of ECF or ECX (72/96 in stratum 1/2, respectively).The primary endpoint is progression-free survival (PFS) in stratum 2 and 77 events are needed for 80% power to detect an increase in PFS from 4 to 6.5 months with lapatinib (HR=0.615, one-sided alpha 10%). Secondary endpoints include PFS, toxicity, response rate, overall survival, and correlation of HER2/EGFR1 status with response. Currently, half of all screened patients (19/38) have been randomized. So far, 8/38 (21%) pts were HER2+ according TOGA criteria. By FISH or IHC, 14/38 were EGFR1+, with 4/14 pts double HER2/EGFR+. Enrolment continues in 5 centers with about 4-10 patients per month. A safety cohort analysis will be performed in the first 15 pts receiving lapatinib. Conclusions: This is the first trial to analyze prospectively and separately the role of lapatinib combined with chemotherapy in EGFR1+ GC pts stratified by FISH/ IHC.

Selective PI3K inhibition by BKM120 and BEZ235 alone or in combination with chemotherapy in wild-type and mutated human gastrointestinal cancer cell lines

522

Background: New targeted agents against tyrosine kinases expand the standard therapy in oncology. However, tumor resistance is still a challenge, particularly induced by mutations in growth-related signalling cascades. 20% and 10% of patients with human colon and gastric cancer carry PI3K mutations and do not react to receptor blocking therapies. Recently, selective tyrosine kinase inhibitors have been generated which block PI3K signalling pathways in tumor cells. Their therapeutically role has not yet been clarified.

Methods: To define inhibitory and pro-apoptotic effects of the 2 PI3K inhibitors BEZ235 and BKM120 3 human colon cancer (HT-29, HCT-116, DLD-1) and 3 gastric cancer cell lines (NCI-n87, AGS, MKN-45) with different PIK3CA mutation status were used. First, viability, apoptosis and caspase assays were performed during incubation with inhibitors alone or combined with cytotoxic agents. Second, molecular consequences for cell cycle and the signalling pathways were analysed by defining the protein levels by FACS and Western blot.

Results: Both PI3K inhibitors BEZ235 and BKM120 induced concentration dependently a significant reduction in viability and an increase in apoptotic death, while mutated cells reacted more sensitive to treatment. BKM120 had a higher efficiency than the dual PI3K/mTOR inhibitor BEZ235. BEZ235 alone caused a G1 arrest in tumor cells. In contrast, BKM120 induced a G2 shift in all gastrointestinal cancer cells. There was a clear downregulation in AKT signalling, and for BEZ235 an additional inhibition of mTOR pathway. Furthermore, BEZ235 caused synergistic induction of apoptosis combined with irinotecan in colon cancer. Combinations with 5-fluoruracil and the 2 substances induced additive apoptotic effects. Human gastric cancer cells were less sensitive to BEZ235 and BKM120.

Conclusions: In general, we found higher pro-apoptotic effects for all cell lines and in special cases a better response of resistant mutant cells. Our data support the clinical development of these PI3K inhibitors BEZ235 and BKM120 as potential targeting agents for patients with different wild-type or mutated gastrointestinal cancer cells.