A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase II study to assess the efficacy/safety of farletuzumab in combination with carboplatin plus paclitaxel or carboplatin plus pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) in women with low CA-125 platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer

Objectives: The primary objective of this study (MORAb-003-011/ENGOT-ov27) was to determine if farletuzumab (FAR) had superior efficacy compared with placebo (PLB) in improving progression-free survival (PFS) when added to carboplatin (carbo)/paclitaxel (pacli) or carbo/PLD, in subjects with platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer in first relapse (platinum-free interval: 6-36 months) with low cancer antigen 125 (CA-125). CA-125 inhibits target cell killing via antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity, thereby reducing the efficacy of immunotherapeutic antibodies. Subgroup analysis in a prior randomized Phase III study±FAR suggested that subjects with CA-125 levels ≤3 x upper limit of normal (ULN), showed superior PFS (hazard risk [HR] = 0.49) and overall survival (OS, HR = 0.44) compared with PLB. Methods: Eligibility included age ≥18 years old, CA-125 ≤3 x ULN (105 U/mL), high-grade serous epithelial ovarian cancer, and previous treatment with debulking surgery and first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. Subjects received 6 cycles with either carbo/pacli every 3 weeks or carbo/PLD in combination with either FAR [5 mg/kg weekly] or PLB in a 2:1 ratio. Maintenance treatment with FAR (5 mg/kg weekly) or PLB was given until disease progression. Tumor assessments were every 6 weeks during the Combination Treatment Phase and every 9 weeks during the Maintenance Treatment Phase. The study was designed to detect a PFS HR of 0.667 (33.3% risk reduction) with FAR compared with PLB with approximately 85% power and a 1-sided type I error rate of 0.10. The comparison of PFS between treatment groups was based on the log-rank test. The HR was estimated based on Cox\u27s proportional-hazards model. Results: A total of 214 subjects were randomized and enrolled, 142 with FAR+chemotherapy (FAR-CT) and 72 with placebo+chemotherapy (PLB-CT). The median PFS in the Intent-to-Treat [ITT] Population was not significantly different between treatment groups; 11.7 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 10.2, 13.6) versus 10.8 months (95% CI: 9.5, 13.2) for FAR-CT and PLB-CT, respectively (HR = 0.89; 80% CI: 0.71, 1.11). An interim analysis of OS showed no significant difference between treatment groups. The overall response rate (ORR) was 69.6% in 96 subjects treated with FAR-CT versus 73.5% in 50 subjects treated with PLB-CT (p=0.53). No significant differences between treatment groups were observed for any other efficacy parameters. The safety profile of the 2 treatment groups was similar except for an increase in interstitial lung disease among the FAR cohort. Interstitial lung disease occurred in 7 of 141 (5.0%) subjects treated with FAR-CT (1 with Grade 1, 4 with Grade 2, and 2 with Grade 3) and none in subjects treated with PLB-CT. Conclusions: The combination of FAR-CT did not show signals of superior efficacy compared with PLB-CT in improving PFS or other efficacy parameters in subjects with platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer in first relapse who had low CA-125 levels. No new safety concerns were identified with the combination of FAR-CT. Since FAR binds to the folate receptor alpha, a novel antibody-drug conjugate has been developed and clinical studies are ongoing to assess the safety/efficacy of this modification. Clinical Trial Registry: NCT02289950

Semaglutide and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with obesity and prevalent heart failure: a prespecified analysis of the SELECT trial

Background: Semaglutide, a GLP-1 receptor agonist, reduces the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in people with overweight or obesity, but the effects of this drug on outcomes in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and heart failure are unknown. We report a prespecified analysis of the effect of once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide 2·4 mg on ischaemic and heart failure cardiovascular outcomes. We aimed to investigate if semaglutide was beneficial in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease with a history of heart failure compared with placebo; if there was a difference in outcome in patients designated as having heart failure with preserved ejection fraction compared with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction; and if the efficacy and safety of semaglutide in patients with heart failure was related to baseline characteristics or subtype of heart failure. Methods: The SELECT trial was a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, placebo-controlled, event-driven phase 3 trial in 41 countries. Adults aged 45 years and older, with a BMI of 27 kg/m2 or greater and established cardiovascular disease were eligible for the study. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) with a block size of four using an interactive web response system in a double-blind manner to escalating doses of once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide over 16 weeks to a target dose of 2·4 mg, or placebo. In a prespecified analysis, we examined the effect of semaglutide compared with placebo in patients with and without a history of heart failure at enrolment, subclassified as heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, or unclassified heart failure. Endpoints comprised MACE (a composite of non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, and cardiovascular death); a composite heart failure outcome (cardiovascular death or hospitalisation or urgent hospital visit for heart failure); cardiovascular death; and all-cause death. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03574597. Findings: Between Oct 31, 2018, and March 31, 2021, 17 604 patients with a mean age of 61·6 years (SD 8·9) and a mean BMI of 33·4 kg/m2 (5·0) were randomly assigned to receive semaglutide (8803 [50·0%] patients) or placebo (8801 [50·0%] patients). 4286 (24·3%) of 17 604 patients had a history of investigator-defined heart failure at enrolment: 2273 (53·0%) of 4286 patients had heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, 1347 (31·4%) had heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, and 666 (15·5%) had unclassified heart failure. Baseline characteristics were similar between patients with and without heart failure. Patients with heart failure had a higher incidence of clinical events. Semaglutide improved all outcome measures in patients with heart failure at random assignment compared with those without heart failure (hazard ratio [HR] 0·72, 95% CI 0·60-0·87 for MACE; 0·79, 0·64-0·98 for the heart failure composite endpoint; 0·76, 0·59-0·97 for cardiovascular death; and 0·81, 0·66-1·00 for all-cause death; all pinteraction>0·19). Treatment with semaglutide resulted in improved outcomes in both the heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HR 0·65, 95% CI 0·49-0·87 for MACE; 0·79, 0·58-1·08 for the composite heart failure endpoint) and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction groups (0·69, 0·51-0·91 for MACE; 0·75, 0·52-1·07 for the composite heart failure endpoint), although patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction had higher absolute event rates than those with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. For MACE and the heart failure composite, there were no significant differences in benefits across baseline age, sex, BMI, New York Heart Association status, and diuretic use. Serious adverse events were less frequent with semaglutide versus placebo, regardless of heart failure subtype. Interpretation: In patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular diease and overweight or obesity, treatment with semaglutide 2·4 mg reduced MACE and composite heart failure endpoints compared with placebo in those with and without clinical heart failure, regardless of heart failure subtype. Our findings could facilitate prescribing and result in improved clinical outcomes for this patient group. Funding: Novo Nordisk

Clinical outcomes of hospitalised patients with COVID-19 and chronic inflammatory and autoimmune rheumatic diseases: a multicentric matched cohort study.

The impact of inflammatory rheumatic diseases on COVID-19 severity is poorly known. Here, we compare the outcomes of a cohort of patients with rheumatic diseases with a matched control cohort to identify potential risk factors for severe illness. In this comparative cohort study, we identified hospital PCR+COVID-19 rheumatic patients with chronic inflammatory arthritis (IA) or connective tissue diseases (CTDs). Non-rheumatic controls were randomly sampled 1:1 and matched by age, sex and PCR date. The main outcome was severe COVID-19, defined as death, invasive ventilation, intensive care unit admission or serious complications. We assessed the association between the outcome and the potential prognostic variables, adjusted by COVID-19 treatment, using logistic regression. The cohorts were composed of 456 rheumatic and non-rheumatic patients, in equal numbers. Mean age was 63 (IQR 53-78) years and male sex 41% in both cohorts. Rheumatic diseases were IA (60%) and CTD (40%). Most patients (74%) had been hospitalised, and the risk of severe COVID-19 was 31.6% in the rheumatic and 28.1% in the non-rheumatic cohort. Ageing, male sex and previous comorbidity (obesity, diabetes, hypertension, cardiovascular or lung disease) increased the risk in the rheumatic cohort by bivariate analysis. In logistic regression analysis, independent factors associated with severe COVID-19 were increased age (OR 4.83; 95% CI 2.78 to 8.36), male sex (1.93; CI 1.21 to 3.07) and having a CTD (OR 1.82; CI 1.00 to 3.30). In hospitalised patients with chronic inflammatory rheumatic diseases, having a CTD but not IA nor previous immunosuppressive therapies was associated with severe COVID-19

A phase II randomised trial of abiraterone acetate plus prednisone in combination with docetaxel or docetaxel plus prednisone after disease progression to abiraterone acetate plus prednisone in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: The ABIDO-SOGUG trial.

We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of maintaining or withdrawing abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (AAP) in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who had experienced cancer progression to this treatment and were beginning a docetaxel-based therapy. Phase II, randomised, open-label study conducted in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who were asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic. After open-label treatment with AAP, patients who had experienced cancer progression to AAP were randomised to 75 mg/m2 of docetaxel plus AAP or to receive 75 mg/m2 of docetaxel plus 10 mg of prednisone orally daily. The primary outcome was the radiographic progression-free survival rate at 12 months as evaluated by the investigators in all randomised patients. A total of 148 patients were included in open-label treatment with AAP, and of them, 94 patients were randomised to receive either docetaxel plus AAP (intervention group; n = 47) or docetaxel plus prednisone (control group; n = 47). The 12-month radiographic progression-free survival rates did not differ between the intervention group (34.9%; 95% CI 20.7-49.2) and the control group (33.9%; 95% CI 19.5-48.3). There were no significant differences in the time to radiographic progression and the overall survival between the intervention and control groups. Grade 3-5 neutropenia with the combination of docetaxel plus prednisone and AA was more frequent than with docetaxel plus prednisone (59.6% versus 27.7%). Our results indicate that the therapeutic strategy of maintaining AAP added to docetaxel in chemotherapy-naïve patients who have experienced cancer progression to AAP treatment should not be further evaluated and should be avoided in clinical practice. NCT02036060 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02036060

Body iron status and gastric cancer risk in the EURGAST study

Although it appears biologically plausible for iron to be associated with gastric carcinogenesis, the evidence is insufficient to lead to any conclusions. To further investigate the relationship between body iron status and gastric cancer risk, we conducted a nested case–control study in the multicentric European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) study. The study included 456 primary incident gastric adenocarcinoma cases and 900 matched controls that occurred during an average of 11 years of follow-up. We measured prediagnostic serum iron, ferritin, transferrin and C-reactive protein, and further estimated total iron-binding capacity (TIBC) and transferrin saturation (TS). Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the risk of gastric cancer by iron metrics were estimated from multivariable conditional logistic regression models. After adjusting for relevant confounders, we observed a statistically significant inverse association between gastric cancer and ferritin and TS indices (ORlog2 = 0.80, 95% CI = 0.72–0.88; OR10%increment = 0.87, 95% CI = 0.78–0.97, respectively). These associations appear to be restricted to noncardia gastric cancer (ferritin showed a p for heterogeneity = 0.04 and TS had a p for heterogeneity = 0.02), and no differences were found by histological type. TIBC increased risk of overall gastric cancer (OR50 µg/dl = 1.13, 95% CI = 1.02–1.2) and also with noncardia gastric cancer (p for heterogeneity = 0.04). Additional analysis suggests that time between blood draw and gastric cancer diagnosis could modify these findings. In conclusion, our results showed a decreased risk of gastric cancer related to higher body iron stores as measured by serum iron and ferritin. Further investigation is needed to clarify the role of iron in gastric carcinogenesis

Atezolizumab with or without chemotherapy in metastatic urothelial cancer (IMvigor130): a multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial

Background Atezolizumab can induce sustained responses in metastatic urothelial carcinoma. We report the results of IMvigor130, a phase 3 trial that compared atezolizumab with or without platinum-based chemotherapy versus placebo plus platinum-based chemotherapy in first-line metastatic urothelial carcinoma

Trebananib or placebo plus carboplatin and paclitaxel as first-line treatment for advanced ovarian cancer (TRINOVA-3/ENGOT-ov2/GOG-3001): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial

Background: Angiopoietin 1 and 2 regulate angiogenesis and vascular remodelling by interacting with the tyrosine kinase receptor Tie2, and inhibition of angiogenesis has shown promise in the treatment of ovarian cancer. We aimed to assess whether trebananib, a peptibody that inhibits binding of angiopoietin 1 and 2 to Tie2, improved progression-free survival when added to carboplatin and paclitaxel as first-line therapy in advanced epithelial ovarian, primary fallopian tube, or peritoneal cancer in a phase 3 clinical trial. Methods: TRINOVA-3, a multicentre, multinational, phase 3, double-blind study, was done at 206 investigational sites (hospitals and cancer centres)in 14 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with biopsy-confirmed International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO)stage III to IV epithelial ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancers, and an ECOG performance status of 0 or 1. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (2:1)using a permuted block method (block size of six patients)to receive six cycles of paclitaxel (175 mg/m2)and carboplatin (area under the serum concentration-time curve 5 or 6)every 3 weeks, plus weekly intravenous trebananib 15 mg/kg or placebo. Maintenance therapy with trebananib or placebo continued for up to 18 additional months. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, as assessed by the investigators, in the intention-to-treat population. Safety analyses included patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01493505, and is complete. Findings: Between Jan 30, 2012, and Feb 25, 2014, 1164 patients were screened and 1015 eligible patients were randomly allocated to treatment (678 to trebananib and 337 to placebo). After a median follow-up of 27·4 months (IQR 17·7–34·2), 626 patients had progression-free survival events (405 [60%]of 678 in the trebananib group and 221 [66%]of 337 in the placebo group). Median progression-free survival did not differ between the trebananib group (15·9 months [15·0–17·6])and the placebo group (15·0 months [12·6–16·1])groups (hazard ratio 0·93 [95% CI 0·79–1·09]; p=0·36). 512 (76%)of 675 patients in the trebananib group and 237 (71%)of 336 in the placebo group had grade 3 or worse treatment-emergent adverse events; of which the most common events were neutropenia (trebananib 238 [35%]vs placebo 126 [38%])anaemia (76 [11%]vs 40 [12%]), and leucopenia (81 [12%]vs 35 [10%]). 269 (40%)patients in the trebananib group and 104 (31%)in the placebo group had serious adverse events. Two fatal adverse events in the trebananib group were considered related to trebananib, paclitaxel, and carboplatin (lung infection and neutropenic colitis); two were considered to be related to paclitaxel and carboplatin (general physical health deterioration and platelet count decreased). No treatment-related fatal adverse events occurred in the placebo group. Interpretation: Trebananib plus carboplatin and paclitaxel did not improve progression-free survival as first-line treatment for advanced ovarian cancer. The combination of trebananib plus carboplatin and paclitaxel did not produce new safety signals. These results show that trebananib in combination with carboplatin and paclitaxel is minimally effective in this patient population. Funding: Amgen

Trebananib or placebo plus carboplatin and paclitaxel as first-line treatment for advanced ovarian cancer (TRINOVA-3/ENGOT-ov2/GOG-3001): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial

Background Angiopoietin 1 and 2 regulate angiogenesis and vascular remodelling by interacting with the tyrosine kinase receptor Tie2, and inhibition of angiogenesis has shown promise in the treatment of ovarian cancer. We aimed to assess whether trebananib, a peptibody that inhibits binding of angiopoietin 1 and 2 to Tie2, improved progression-free survival when added to carboplatin and paclitaxel as first-line therapy in advanced epithelial ovarian, primary fallopian tube, or peritoneal cancer in a phase 3 clinical trial.Methods TRINOVA-3, a multicentre, multinational, phase 3, double-blind study, was done at 206 investigational sites (hospitals and cancer centres) in 14 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with biopsy-confirmed International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage III to IV epithelial ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancers, and an ECOG performance status of 0 or 1. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (2:1) using a permuted block method (block size of six patients) to receive six cycles of paclitaxel (175 mg/m(2)) and carboplatin (area under the serum concentration-time curve 5 or 6) every 3 weeks, plus weekly intravenous trebananib 15 mg/kg or placebo. Maintenance therapy with trebananib or placebo continued for u p to 18 additional months. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, as assessed by the investigators, in the intention-to-treat population. Safety analyses induded patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials. gov , number NCT01493505, and is complete.Findings Between Jan 30,2012, and Feb 25,2014,1164 patients were screened and 1015 eligible patients were randomly allocated to treatment (678 to trebananib and 337 to placebo). After a median follow-up of 27.4 months (IQR 17.7-34.2), 626 patients had progression-free survival events (405 [60%] of 678 in the trebananib group and 221 [66%] of 337 in the placebo group). Median progression-free survival did not differ between the trebananib group (15.9 months [15.0-17.6]) and the placebo group (15.0 months [12.6-16.1]) groups (hazard ratio 0.93 [95% CI 0.79-1.09]; p=0.36). 512 (76%) of 675 patients in the trebananib group and 237 (71%) of 336 in the placebo group had grade 3 or worse treatment-emergent adverse events; of which the most common events were neutropenia (trebananib 238 [35%] vs placebo 126 [38%]) anaemia (76 [11%] vs 40 [12%]), and leucopenia (81 [12%] vs 35 [10%]). 269 (40%) patients in the trebananib group and 104 (31%) in the placebo group had serious adverse events. Two fatal adverse events in the trebananib group were considered related to trebananib, paclitaxel, and carboplatin (lung infection and neutropenic colitis); two were considered to be related to paclitaxel and carboplatin (general physical health deterioration and platelet count decreased). No treatment-related fatal adverse events occurred in the placebo group.Interpretation Trebananib plus carboplatin and paclitaxel did not improve progression-free survival as first-line treatment for advanced ovarian cancer. The combination of trebananib plus carboplatin and paclitaxel did not produce new safety signals. These results show that trebananib in combination with carboplatin and paclitaxel is minimally effective in this patient population. Copyright (C) 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.Experimentele farmacotherapi