Chemotherapy after nivolumab for advanced gastric cancer (REVIVE): a prospective observational study

BACKGROUND

Nivolumab therapy is a standard-of-care treatment for heavily pretreated patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC). Previous studies have reported improvement in the objective response rate to chemotherapy after nivolumab therapy for other types of cancer. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of chemotherapy after nivolumab therapy in AGC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We conducted a prospective, multicenter, observational study in pretreated patients with nivolumab-refractory or -intolerant AGC. Patients received irinotecan, oxaliplatin-containing regimens, or trifluridine/tipiracil. The primary endpoint was overall survival.

RESULTS

A total of 199 patients were included (median age: 69 years; male: 70%; female: 30%). Median overall survival and progression-free survival were 7.5 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 6.7-9.7 months] and 2.9 months (95% CI: 2.2-3.5 months), respectively. Objective response and disease control rates were 16.8% (95% CI: 11.6% to 23.6%) and 18.9% (95% CI: 38.9% to 54.6%), respectively. A prognostic index using alkaline phosphatase and the Glasgow Prognostic Score was generated to classify patients into three risk groups (good, moderate, and poor). The hazard ratios of the moderate and poor groups to the good group were 1.88 (95% CI: 1.22-2.92) and 3.29 (95% CI: 1.92-5.63), respectively. At the initiation of chemotherapy, 42 patients had experienced immune-related adverse events due to prior nivolumab therapy. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (7.5%), anemia (8.0%), and anorexia (7.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

The administration of cytotoxic chemotherapy after nivolumab therapy may give rise to a synergistic antitumor effect in AGC. Further investigation is warranted to confirm these findings.

Impact of the 12-gene recurrence score assay on deciding adjuvant chemotherapy for stage II and IIIA/B colon cancer: the SUNRISE-DI study

BACKGROUND

Recent advances in adjuvant chemotherapy for early colon cancer have widened physicians' recommendations on the regimen and duration (3 or 6 months) of the treatment. We conducted this prospective study to evaluate whether the 12-gene recurrence score (12-RS) assay affected physicians' recommendations on adjuvant treatment selection.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with stage IIIA/IIIB or stage II colon cancer were enrolled. After the patients discussed adjuvant treatment with their treating physicians, the physicians filled in the questionnaire before assay indicating the treatment recommendation. When the 12-RS assay results were available, the physicians again filled in the questionnaire after assay. The primary endpoint was the rate of change in treatment recommendations from before to after the assay, with a threshold rate of change being 20%. Patients with stage IIIA/B to II were enrolled in a ratio of 2 : 1.

RESULTS

Overall, the treatment recommendations changed in 40% of cases after obtaining 12-RS assay results. Recommendations were changed in 45% (80/178; 95% confidence interval, 37% to 53%; P < 0.001) and 30% (29/97; 95% confidence interval, 21% to 40%; P < 0.001) of patients with stage IIIA/B and II colon cancer, respectively. Patients with stage IIIA/B cancer had significantly more change than those with stage II cancer (P = 0.0148). From before to after the 12-RS assay, the percentage of patients whose physicians reported being confident in their treatment recommendations significantly increased from 54% to 81% in stage IIIA/B (P < 0.001) and from 65% to 83% in stage II (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Our study confirmed the usefulness of the 12-RS assay in aiding the physician-patient decision-making process for tailoring adjuvant chemotherapy for stage IIIA/B colon cancer.

Neutropenia and survival outcomes in metastatic colorectal cancer patients treated with trifluridine/tipiracil in the RECOURSE and J003 trials

Background:

The phase II J003 (N = 169) and phase III RECOURSE (N = 800) trials demonstrated a significant improvement in survival with trifluridine (FTD)/tipiracil (TPI) versus placebo in patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. This post hoc analysis investigated pharmacokinetic data of FTD/TPI exposure and pharmacodynamic markers, such as chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN) and clinical outcomes.

Patients and methods:

A total of 210 patients from RECOURSE were enrolled in this substudy. A limited sampling approach was used, with three pharmacokinetic samples drawn on day 12 of cycle 1. Patients were categorized as being above or below the median area under the plasma concentration–time curve (AUC) for FTD and TPI. We conducted a post hoc analysis using the entire RECOURSE population to determine the correlations between CIN and clinical outcome. We then carried out a similar analysis on the J003 trial to validate the results.

Results:

In the RECOURSE subset, patients in the high FTD AUC group had a significantly increased CIN risk. Analyses of the entire population demonstrated that FTD/TPI-treated patients with CIN of any grade in cycles 1 and 2 had significantly longer median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) than patients who did not develop CIN and patients in the placebo group. Patients who required an FTD/TPI treatment delay had increased OS and PFS versus those in the placebo group and those who did not develop CIN. Similar results were obtained in the J003 cohort.

Conclusions:

In RECOURSE, patients with higher FTD drug exposure had an increased CIN risk. FTD/TPI-treated patients who developed CIN had improved OS and PFS versus those in the placebo group and those who did not develop CIN. Similar findings were reported in the J003 cohort, thus validating the RECOURSE results. The occurrence of CIN may be a useful predictor of treatment outcomes for FTD/TPI-treated patients.

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier:

NCT01607957 (RECOURSE).

Japan Pharmaceutical Information Center number:

JapicCTI-090880 (J003).

Randomized phase III study of bevacizumab plus FOLFIRI and bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX6 as first-line treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (WJOG4407G)

BACKGROUND

FOLFIRI and FOLFOX have shown equivalent efficacy for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), but their comparative effectiveness is unknown when combined with bevacizumab.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

WJOG4407G was a randomized, open-label, phase III trial conducted in Japan. Patients with previously untreated mCRC were randomized 1:1 to receive either FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab (FOLFIRI + Bev) or mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab (mFOLFOX6 + Bev), stratified by institution, adjuvant chemotherapy, and liver-limited disease. The primary end point was non-inferiority of FOLFIRI + Bev to mFOLFOX6 + Bev in progression-free survival (PFS), with an expected hazard ratio (HR) of 0.9 and non-inferiority margin of 1.25 (power 0.85, one-sided α-error 0.025). The secondary end points were response rate (RR), overall survival (OS), safety, and quality of life (QoL) during 18 months. This trial is registered to the University Hospital Medical Information Network, number UMIN000001396.

RESULTS

Among 402 patients enrolled from September 2008 to January 2012, 395 patients were eligible for efficacy analysis. The median PFS for FOLFIRI + Bev (n = 197) and mFOLFOX6 + Bev (n = 198) were 12.1 and 10.7 months, respectively [HR, 0.905; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.723-1.133; P = 0.003 for non-inferiority]. The median OS for FOLFIRI + Bev and mFOLFOX6 + Bev were 31.4 and 30.1 months, respectively (HR, 0.990; 95% CI 0.785-1.249). The best overall RRs were 64% for FOLFIRI + Bev and 62% for mFOLFOX6 + Bev. The common grade 3 or higher adverse events were leukopenia (11% in FOLFIRI + Bev/5% in mFOLFOX6 + Bev), neutropenia (46%/35%), diarrhea (9%/5%), febrile neutropenia (5%/2%), peripheral neuropathy (0%/22%), and venous thromboembolism (6%/2%). The QoL assessed by FACT-C (TOI-PFC) and FACT/GOG-Ntx was favorable for FOLFIRI + Bev during 18 months.

CONCLUSION

FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab was non-inferior for PFS, compared with mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab, as the first-line systemic treatment for mCRC.

CLINICAL TRIALS NUMBER

UMIN000001396.

Phase III study comparing oxaliplatin plus S-1 with cisplatin plus S-1 in chemotherapy-naïve patients with advanced gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

We evaluated the efficacy and safety of S-1 plus oxaliplatin (SOX) as an alternative to cisplatin plus S-1 (CS) in first-line chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer (AGC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this randomized, open-label, multicenter phase III study, patients were randomly assigned to receive SOX (80-120 mg/day S-1 for 2 weeks with 100 mg/m(2) oxaliplatin on day 1, every 3 weeks) or CS (S-1 for 3 weeks with 60 mg/m(2) cisplatin on day 8, every 5 weeks). The primary end points were noninferiority in progression-free survival (PFS) and relative efficacy in overall survival (OS) for SOX using adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) with stratification factors; performance status and unresectable or recurrent (+adjuvant chemotherapy) disease.

RESULTS

Overall, 685 patients were randomized from January 2010 to October 2011. In per-protocol population, SOX (n = 318) was noninferior to CS (n = 324) in PFS [median, 5.5 versus 5.4 months; HR 1.004, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.840-1.199; predefined noninferiority margin 1.30]. The median OS for SOX and CS were 14.1 and 13.1 months, respectively (HR 0.958 with 95% CI 0.803-1.142). In the intention-to-treat population (SOX, n = 339; CS, n = 337), the HRs in PFS and OS were 0.979 (95% CI 0.821-1.167) and 0.934 (95% CI 0.786-1.108), respectively. The most common ≥grade 3 adverse events (SOX versus CS) were neutropenia (19.5% versus 41.8%), anemia (15.1% versus 32.5%), hyponatremia (4.4% versus 13.4%), febrile neutropenia (0.9% versus 6.9%), and sensory neuropathy (4.7% versus 0%).

CONCLUSION

SOX is as effective as CS for AGC with favorable safety profile, therefore SOX can replace CS.

CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER

JapicCTI-101021.

Survival analysis of platinum-refractory patients with advanced esophageal cancer treated with docetaxel or best supportive care alone: a retrospective study

The survival benefit of second-line chemotherapy with docetaxel in platinum-refractory patients with advanced esophageal cancer (AEC) remains unclear. A retrospective analysis of AEC patients with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (PS)≤2 was performed, and major organ functions were preserved, who determined to receive docetaxel or best supportive care (BSC) alone after failure of platinum-based chemotherapy. The post-progression survival (PPS), defined as survival time after disease progression following platinum-based chemotherapy, was analyzed by multivariate Cox regression analysis using factors identified as significant in univariate analysis of various 20 characteristics (age, sex, PS, primary tumor location, etc) including Glasgow prognostic score (GPS), which is a well-known prognostic factor in many malignant tumors. Sixty-six and 45 patients were determined to receive docetaxel and BSC between January 2007 and December 2011, respectively. The median PPS was 5.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 4.8-6.0) in the docetaxel group and 3.3 months (95% CI 2.5-4.0) in the BSC group (hazard ratio [HR] 0.56, 95% CI 0.38-0.84, P=0.005). Univariate analysis revealed six significant factors: treatment, PS, GPS, number of metastatic organs, liver metastasis, and bone metastasis. Multivariate analysis including these significant factors revealed three independent prognostic factors: docetaxel treatment (HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.39-0.99, P=0.043), better GPS (HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.46-0.81, P=0.001), and no bone metastasis (HR 0.31, 95% CI 0.15-0.68, P=0.003). There was a trend for PPS in favor of the docetaxel group compared with patients who refused docetaxel treatment in the BSC group (adjusted HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.29-1.29, P=0.20). Docetaxel treatment may have prolonged survival in platinum-refractory patients with AEC.

Impact of excision repair cross-complementing gene 1 (ERCC1) on the outcomes of patients with advanced gastric cancer: correlative study in Japan Clinical Oncology Group Trial JCOG9912

BACKGROUND

Since the best chemotherapy regimen for each patient with advanced gastric cancer is uncertain, we aimed to identify molecular prognostic or predictive biomarkers from biopsy specimens in JCOG9912, a randomized phase III trial for advanced gastric cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Endoscopic biopsy specimens from primary lesions were collected in 445 of 704 randomized patients in JCOG9912. We measured the mRNA expression of excision repair cross-complementing group 1 (ERCC1), thymidylate synthase, dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase, and five other genes, then, categorized them into low and high groups relative to the median, and examined whether gene expression was associated with efficacy end point.

RESULTS

Multivariate analyses showed that high ERCC1 expression [HR 1.37; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08-1.75; P = 0.010], performance status ≥ 1 (HR 1.45; 95% CI 1.13-1.86; P = 0.004), and number of metastatic sites ≥ 2 (HR 1.66; 95% CI 1.28-1.86; P < 0.001) were associated with a poor prognosis, and recurrent disease (versus unresectable; HR 0.75; 95% CI 0.56-1.00; P = 0.049) was associated with a favorable prognosis. None of these molecular factors were a predictive marker for choosing irinotecan plus cisplatin or 5-fluorouracil rather than S-1.

CONCLUSION

These correlative analyses suggest that ERCC1 is an independent prognostic factor for overall survival in the first-line treatment of gastric cancer.

CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER

C000000062, www.umin.ac.jp.

The effect of CYP2C19 polymorphism on the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of tivantinib (ARQ 197): results from a phase I trial in advanced solid tumors

BACKGROUND

Tivantinib (formerly ARQ 197) is a selective inhibitor of c-Met mainly metabolized by CYP2C19. CYP2C19 is known for genetic polymorphisms, and ~20% of Asians are poor metabolizers (PMs), while others are extensive metabolizers (EMs). In this study, we examined the safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), and preliminary efficacy of tivantinib as a single agent to determine recommended phase II doses (RPIIDs).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Forty-seven patients (EMs, 33; PMs, 14) with solid tumors were orally treated with tivantinib, from 70 to 360 mg bid in a 3 + 3 dose-escalation scheme. EMs and PMs were separately enrolled at the doses >120 mg bid.

RESULTS

Tivantinib was well tolerated up to 360 mg bid for EMs and 240 mg bid for PMs. Neutropenia, leukopenia, anemia, fatigue, and anorexia were the frequent adverse events related to tivantinib and were commonly observed in both EMs and PMs. PMs had 1.9-fold higher AUC(0-12) compared with EMs at 240 mg bid. Regardless of CYP2C19 phenotype, Gr.4 neutropenia occurred in patients with relatively high exposure to tivantinib. A confirmed partial response was achieved in two non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients.

CONCLUSION

Two different settings of RPIIDs, 360 mg bid for EMs and 240 mg bid for PMs, were determined.