CHEOPS trial: a GINECO group randomized phase II assessing addition of a non-steroidal aromatase inhibitor to oral vinorelbine in pre-treated metastatic breast cancer patients

BACKGROUND

The objective of the CHEOPS trial was to assess the benefit of adding aromatase inhibitor (AI) to metronomic chemotherapy, oral vinorelbine, 50 mg, three times a week for pre-treated, HR + /HER2- metastatic breast cancer patients.

METHODS

In this multicentric phase II study, patients had to have progressed on AI and one or two lines of chemotherapy. They were randomized between oral vinorelbine (Arm A) and oral vinorelbine with non-steroidal AI (Arm B).

RESULTS

121 patients were included, 61 patients in Arm A and 60 patients in Arm B. The median age was 68 years. 109 patients had visceral metastases. They all had previously received an AI. The study had been prematurely stopped following the third death due to febrile neutropenia. Median PFS trend was found to be different with 2.3 months and 3.7 months in Arm A and Arm B, respectively (HR 0.73, 95%CI 0.50-1.06, p value = 0.0929). No statistical difference was shown in OS and better tumor response. 56 serious adverse events corresponding to 25 patients (21%) were reported (respectively, 12 (20%) versus 13 (22%) for arms A and B) (NS).

CONCLUSION

The addition of AI to oral vinorelbine over oral vinorelbine alone in aromatase inhibitor-resistant metastatic breast cancer was associated with a non-significant improvement of PFS. Several unexpected serious adverse events were reported. Metronomic oral vinorelbine schedule, at 50 mg three times a week, requires close biological monitoring. The question of hormonal treatment and chemotherapy combination remains open.

Sample size computation in phase II designs combining the A'Hern design and the Sargent and Goldberg design

This work focuses on the modification of two classical phase II trials designs, the A'Hern design, a single-arm single-stage design, and the Sargent and Goldberg design introduced in the context of flexible screening designs. In the first part of the paper, we have proposed a drift-adjusted A'Hern design, a hybrid design combining the A'Hern design and the Sargent and Goldberg design. Indeed, classical single-arm phase II designs such as the A'Hern design are still widely used in oncology. Conducting randomized comparative phase II trials may be challenging in many settings due to the increased sample size and this despite larger type 1 errors. Randomized non-comparative phase II designs first introduced by Herson and Carter include a simultaneous randomized standard-treatment reference arm to detect any drift in the reference arm assumption, but the trial is analyzed against historical controls as if it were a single-arm study. However, not incorporating at all an internal control arm in the trial design has been criticized in the literature. Our new design takes into account the observed response rate in a non-comparative reference arm to reduce the trial's risk of a false-positive conclusion. In the second part, we have proposed an alternative strategy to determining the sample size of the screened selection design. The latter, introduced in recent years by Yap et al. and Wu et al., extended the Sargent and Goldberg design to include a comparison to a historical control. However, their sample size computations may have potential weaknesses, which motivated us to revisit the existing approaches. A detailed simulation study has been carried out to evaluate the operating characteristics of the drift-adjusted A'Hern design and the different sample size strategies of the screened selection designs.

An Intergroup Randomized Phase II Study of Bevacizumab or Cetuximab in Combination with Gemcitabine and in Combination with Chemoradiation in Patients with Resected Pancreatic Carcinoma: A Trial of the ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group (E2204)

OBJECTIVES

Evaluate toxicity of two treatment arms, A (cetuximab) and B (bevacizumab), when combined with gemcitabine, and chemoradiation in patients with completely resected pancreatic carcinoma. Secondary objectives included overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS).

METHODS

Patients with R0/R1 resection were randomized 1:1 to cetuximab or bevacizumab administered in combination with gemcitabine for two treatment cycles. Next three cycles included concurrent cetuximab/bevacizumab plus chemoradiation, followed by one cycle of cetuximab/bevacizumab. Cycles 7-12 included cetuximab/bevacizumab with gemcitabine. Cycles were 2 weeks. Frequency of specific toxicities was summarized for each treatment arm at two times during the study, after chemotherapy but prior to chemoradiation and after all therapy.

RESULTS

A total of 127 patients were randomized (A, n = 65; B, n = 62). Prior to chemoradiation, the overall rate for toxicities of interest was 10% for arm A and 2% for arm B. After all therapy, the overall rates for toxicities of interest were 30 and 25% for arms A and B, respectively. Overall median OS and DFS were 17 and 11 months, respectively, which is not a significant improvement over expected survival rates for historical controls.

CONCLUSIONS

Both treatments were tolerable with manageable toxicities, and were safe enough for a phase III trial had this been indicated.

Randomized study comparing full dose monotherapy (S-1 followed by irinotecan) and reduced dose combination therapy (S-1/oxaliplatin followed by S-1/irinotecan) as initial therapy for older patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: NORDIC 9

Background

Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is a disease of older age, but there is a relative lack of knowledge about effects of chemotherapy in older patients as they are under-represented in clinical trials. Little data can guide whether the strategy in older mCRC patients should be a sequential full-dose monotherapy chemotherapy approach or a dose-reduced combination chemotherapy approach. The oral 5FU prodrug S-1 seems to have less side effects than capecitabine and should be an optimal drug for older patients, but few data are available. Improved geriatric assessments are needed to select which older patients should receive therapy.

Methods

The NORDIC 9 trial is a Nordic multicenter randomized phase II study comparing full dose monotherapy (S-1 30 mg/m² twice daily days 1–14 every 3 weeks, followed by second line irinotecan 250–350 mg/m² iv day 1 every 3 weeks or 180–250 mg/m² iv day 1 every 2 weeks) with reduced dose combination therapy (S-1 20 mg/m² days 1–14 + oxaliplatin 100 mg/m² iv day 1 every 3 weeks, followed by second line S-1 20 mg/m² days 1–14 + irinotecan 180 mg/m² day 1 every 3 week) for older patients (≥70 years) with mCRC who are not candidates for full-dose standard combination therapy. Additional bevacizumab (7.5 mg/kg) is optional in first-line. Blood samples and tumor tissue will be collected to investigate predictive markers. Geriatric screening tools (G-8, VES-13, Timed-Up-and-Go and Handgrip strength), Charlson Comorbidty Index and quality of life (EORTC QLQ-C30) will be evaluated as predictors of efficacy and toxicity. The target sample size is 150 patients.

The primary endpoint is progression-free survival and secondary endpoints are time-to-failure of strategy, overall survival, response rate, toxicity, and correlations between biomarkers, pre-treatment characteristics and geriatric assessments.

Discussion

The study will add knowledge on how to treat older mCRC patients who are not candidates for standard combination therapy. Furthermore it may provide understanding of efficacy and tolerability of chemotherapy in older cancer patients and thus offer a better chance for tailored treatment strategies in these patients.

Trial registration

EU Clinical Trial Register, EudraCT no. 2014–000394-39. Registered 05 May 2014.

Phase I/II study of docetaxel combined with resminostat, an oral hydroxamic acid HDAC inhibitor, for advanced non-small cell lung cancer in patients previously treated with platinum-based chemotherapy

Objectives To determine the recommended dose and efficacy/safety of docetaxel combined with resminostat (DR) in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with previous platinum-based chemotherapy. Materials and Methods A multicenter, open-label, phase I/II study was performed in Japanese patients with stage IIIB/IV or recurrent NSCLC and prior platinum-based chemotherapy. The recommended phase II dose was determined using a standard 3 + 3 dose design in phase I part. Resminostat was escalated from 400 to 600 mg/day and docetaxel fixed at 75 mg/m². In phase II part, the patients were randomly assigned to docetaxel alone (75 mg/m²) or DR therapy. Docetaxel was administered on day 1 and resminostat on days 1-5 in the DR group. Treatment was repeated every 21 days until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Results A total of 117 patients (phase I part, 9; phase II part, 108) were enrolled. There was no dose-limiting toxicity in phase I part; the recommended dose for resminostat was 600 mg/day with 75 mg/m² of docetaxel. In phase II part, median PFS (95% confidence interval [CI]) was 4.2 (2.8-5.7) months with docetaxel group and 4.1 (1.5-5.4) months with DR group (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.354, 95% CI: 0.835-2.195; p = 0.209). Grade ≥ 3 adverse events significantly more common with DR group than docetaxel group were leukopenia, febrile neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and anorexia. Conclusion In Japanese NSCLC patients previously treated with platinum-based chemotherapy, DR therapy did not improve PFS compared with docetaxel alone and increased toxicity.