49 research outputs found
Epirubicin With Cyclophosphamide Followed by Docetaxel With Trastuzumab and Bevacizumab as Neoadjuvant Therapy for HER2-Positive Locally Advanced Breast Cancer or as Adjuvant Therapy for HER2-Positive Pathologic Stage III Breast Cancer: A Phase II Trial of the NSABP Foundation Research Group, FB-5
Background The purpose of this study was to determine the cardiac safety and clinical activity of trastuzumab and bevacizumab with docetaxel after epirubicin with cyclophosphamide (EC) in patients with HER2-positive locally advanced breast cancer (LABC) or pathologic stage 3 breast cancer (PS3BC). Patients and Methods Patients received every 3 week treatment with 4 cycles of EC (90/600 mg/m2) followed by 4 cycles of docetaxel (100 mg/m2). Targeted therapy with standard-dose trastuzumab with bevacizumab 15 mg/kg was given for a total of 1 year. Coprimary end points were (1) rate of cardiac events (CEs) in all patients defined as clinical congestive heart failure with a significant decrease in left ventricular ejection fraction or cardiac deaths; and (2) pathologic complete response (pCR) in breast and nodes in the neoadjuvant cohort. An independent cardiac review panel determined whether criteria for a CE were met. Results A total of 105 patients were accrued, 76 with LABC treated with neoadjuvant therapy and 29 with PS3BC treated with adjuvant therapy. Median follow-up was 59.2 months. Among 99 evaluable patients for cardiac safety, 4 (4%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1%-10.0%) met CE criteria. The pCR percentage in LABC patients was 46% (95% CI, 34%-59%). Five-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) for all patients was 79.9% and 90.8%, respectively. Conclusion The regimen met predefined criteria for activity of interest with an acceptable rate of CEs. Although the pCR percentage was comparable with chemotherapy regimens with trastuzumab alone the high RFS and OS are of interest in these high-risk populations
Combination of everolimus with trastuzumab plus paclitaxel as first-line treatment for patients with HER2-positive advanced breast cancer (BOLERO-1) : a phase 3, randomised, double-blind, multicentre trial
BACKGROUND : mTOR inhibition has been shown to reverse trastuzumab resistance from hyperactivated the PIK/AKT/mTOR pathway due to PTEN loss, by sensitizing PTEN-deficient tumors towards trastuzumab. The BOLERO-1 study evaluated the efficacy and safety of adding everolimus to trastuzumab and paclitaxel as first-line therapy for HER2+ advanced breast cancer (ABC). METHODS : In this phase III, randomized, double-blind trial, patients were enrolled across 141 sites in 28 countries. Eligible patients were ≥18 years of age, with locally assessed HER2+ advanced breast cancer (ABC), with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, who had not received prior trastuzumab or chemotherapy for ABC, had measurable disease as per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors or bone lesions in the absence of measurable disease, without prior systemic therapy for advanced disease except endocrine therapy. The patients were randomized 2:1 (with an interactive voice and web response system) to receive either daily everolimus (10 mg/day) orally or placebo plus weekly trastuzumab intravenously at 4 mg/kg loading dose on Day-1 with subsequent weekly doses of 2 mg/kg of each 4-week cycle plus paclitaxel intravenously at a dose of 80 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 of each 4- week cycle. Randomization was stratified according to prior use of trastuzumab and visceral metastasis. Patients and investigators were blinded to the assigned treatments. Identity of experimental treatments was concealed by use of everolimus and placebo that were identical in packaging, labelling, appearance, and administration schedule. The two primary objectives were investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) in the full study population and in the subset of patients with hormone receptor-negative (HR) breast cancer at baseline; the latter was added during the course of the study, prior to unblinding based on new clinical and biological findings from other studies. All efficacy analyses were based on the intention-to-treat population. Enrolment for this trial is closed and results of the final PFS analyses are presented here. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00876395. FINDINGS : Between 10-Sep-2009 and 16-Dec-2012, 719 patients were randomized to receive everolimus (n=480) or placebo (n=239). Median follow-up was 41.3 months (IQR: 35.4 – 46.6 months). INTERPRETATION : The primary objective in the full population was not met; median PFS was 15.0 months with everolimus vs 14.5 months with placebo (hazard ratio, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.73-1.08; p=0.1166). In the HR subpopulation (n=311), median PFS with everolimus was 20.3 months vs 13.1 months with placebo (hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.48-0.91; p=0.0049), however, the protocol-specified statistical significance threshold (p=0.0044) was not crossed. The most common adverse events (AEs) with everolimus vs placebo were stomatitis (314 [66.5%] vs 77 [32.4%] patients), diarrhea (267 [56.6%] vs 111 [46.6%] patients), and alopecia (221 [46.8%] vs 125 [52.5%]). The most frequently reported grade 3/4 AEs in the EVE arm vs PBO arm were neutropenia (117 [24.8%] of 472 patients vs 35 [14.7%] of 238 patients), stomatitis (59 [12.5%] of 472 patients vs 3 [1.3%] of 238 patients), anemia (46 [9.7%] of 472 patients vs 6 [2.5%] of 238 patients) and diarrhea (43 [9.1%] of 472 patients vs 10 [4.2%] of 238 patients) On-treatment AE-related deaths were reported in 17 [3.6%] vs 0% of patients respectively.Interpretation: The primary objective of PFS was not met. However, consistent with the preliminary observations from BOLERO-3, everolimus prolonged median PFS by 7.2 months in patients with HR, HER2+ ABC, which warrants further investigation. The safety profile was generally consistent with what was previously reported in BOLERO-3. Proactive monitoring and early management of AEs in patients treated with everolimus and chemotherapy is critical..Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation.http://www.journals.elsevier.com/the-lancet-oncology2016-07-31hb201
The 70-gene signature as a response predictor for neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer
Immunohistochemistry and fluorescence in situ hybridization assessment of HER2 in clinical trials of adjuvant therapy for breast cancer (NCCTG N9831, BCIRG 006, and BCIRG 005)
Post-progression survival (PPS) and improvements in progression-free survival (PFS) in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in advanced gastric cancer (AGC).
Time trends in overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in the first-line treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).
Phase II randomized clinical trial evaluating neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimens with weekly paclitaxel (WP) or eribulin (E) followed by doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC) in women with locally advanced HER2-negative breast cancer (LABC): NSABP FB-9.
Radiotherapy (RT), temozolomide (TMZ), procarbazine (PCB), and the integrin inhibitor cilengitide in patients (pts) with glioblastoma (GBM) without methylation of the MGMT gene promoter (ExCentric): Results of an Australian phase II clinical trial.
Impact of follow-up on generalized pairwise comparisons for estimating the irinotecan benefit in advanced/metastatic gastric cancer
International audienceBackground and objectives: The net treatment effect (∆) is a new method to assess the treatment benefit that combines multiple time-to-event, binary and continuous endpoints according to a pre-specified sequence. It represents the net probability for a random patient treated in the experimental arm to have a better overall outcome than a random patient from the control arm does. We aimed at characterizing the impact of follow-up on ∆ estimated from both time-to-event and binary toxicity endpoints, in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of irinotecan-based regimen in advanced/metastatic gastric cancer (AGC). Study design: Three RCTs are reanalysed. The net treatment effect using from one to three outcomes (i.e. overall survival, time to progression and toxicity in this order) and the hazard ratio (HR) were estimated after various cut-off dates and compared to the values obtained after complete follow-up were reported. Results: In all three RCTs (897 patients), the irinotecan-based regimen was superior to the non-irinotecan containing regimen in terms of HR and ∆. This superiority was lower when the net treatment effect also accounted for toxicity. The HR was slightly less influenced by an incomplete follow-up than ∆ was, but correction proposed by Péron to account for censored observations showed quite robust results. Conclusions: The net treatment effect using Péron's correction can be used in case of interim analyses or high censoring rates. In addition to relative measures such as the hazard ratio, it provides a simple mean to evaluate the net treatment effect with and without toxicity outcomes