189 research outputs found

    An extended phase Ib study of epertinib, an orally active reversible dual EGFR/HER2 tyrosine kinase inhibitor, in patients with solid tumours.

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Dose-escalation of epertinib (S-222611), a new potent oral EGFR/HER2 inhibitor, has established a recommended daily dose of 800 mg in patients with solid tumours. In this study, we have recruited a larger number of patients to assess further the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PKs) and antitumour activity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with solid tumours expressing EGFR or HER2 received a single dose of epertinib at 800 mg on Day 1 to assess PK over 7 days, followed by continuous once-daily dosing from Day 8. RESULTS: We treated 76 patients with breast (n = 27), upper gastrointestinal (GI; n = 30), head and neck (n = 12) or renal cancers (n = 7). Epertinib was well-tolerated with mostly grade I and II adverse events (AEs). The most frequent AE was diarrhoea, which was generally manageable with loperamide. The objective response rate (ORR) in patients with heavily pretreated breast and upper GI cancers was 16.0% (4 PRs) and 8.3% (1CR, 1PR), respectively. All six responding patients had HER2-positive tumours; the ORR for HER2-positive breast and upper GI cancer populations was 19.0% and 20.0%. Partial response in the brain disease of one breast cancer patient lasted 7.5 months. CONCLUSION: Once-daily dosing of epertinib at 800 mg was well-tolerated and demonstrated promising antitumour activity in patients with heavily pretreated HER2-positive breast and upper GI cancer, including those with brain metastases. EUDRACT NUMBER: 2009-017817-31

    regorafenib monotherapy for previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer (CORRECT): an international, multicentre, randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

    Get PDF
    Summary Background No treatment options are available for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer that progresses after all approved standard therapies, but many patients maintain a good performance status and could be candidates for further therapy. An international phase 3 trial was done to assess the multikinase inhibitor regorafenib in these patients. Methods We did this trial at 114 centres in 16 countries. Patients with documented metastatic colorectal cancer and progression during or within 3 months after the last standard therapy were randomised (in a 2:1 ratio; by computer-generated randomisation list and interactive voice response system; preallocated block design (block size six); stratified by previous treatment with VEGF-targeting drugs, time from diagnosis of metastatic disease, and geographical region) to receive best supportive care plus oral regorafenib 160 mg or placebo once daily, for the first 3 weeks of each 4 week cycle. The primary endpoint was overall survival. The study sponsor, participants, and investigators were masked to treatment assignment. Efficacy analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01103323. Findings Between April 30, 2010, and March 22, 2011, 1052 patients were screened, 760 patients were randomised to receive regorafenib (n=505) or placebo (n=255), and 753 patients initiated treatment (regorafenib n=500; placebo n=253; population for safety analyses). The primary endpoint of overall survival was met at a preplanned interim analysis; data cutoff was on July 21, 2011. Median overall survival was 6·4 months in the regorafenib group versus 5·0 months in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·77; 95% CI 0·64–0·94; one-sided p=0·0052). Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 465 (93%) patients assigned regorafenib and in 154 (61%) of those assigned placebo. The most common adverse events of grade three or higher related to regorafenib were hand-foot skin reaction (83 patients, 17%), fatigue (48, 10%), diarrhoea (36, 7%), hypertension (36, 7%), and rash or desquamation (29, 6%). Interpretation Regorafenib is the first small-molecule multikinase inhibitor with survival benefits in metastatic colorectal cancer which has progressed after all standard therapies. The present study provides evidence for a continuing role of targeted treatment after disease progression, with regorafenib offering a potential new line of therapy in this treatment-refractory population

    Oxaliplatin and protracted venous infusion of 5-fluorouracil in patients with advanced or relapsed 5-fluorouracil pretreated colorectal cancer

    Get PDF
    The purpose of this study was to evaluate the activity and safety of oxaliplatin and protracted venous infusion of 5-fluorouracil (PVI 5-FU) in patients with advanced or relapsed 5-FU pretreated colorectal cancer. 38 patients with advanced or metastatic colorectal carcinoma with documented progression on or within 6 months following 5-FU or thymidylate synthase inhibitor containing chemotherapy were recruited between June 1997 and September 2000. Oxaliplatin (100 mg m−2) was given every 2 weeks and PVI 5-FU (300 mg m−2day−1) was administered. Median age of patients was 61 years. 17 patients had >2 sites of disease involvement. 10 had received 5-FU based adjuvant chemotherapy. 16 received oxaliplatin and PVI 5-FU as second-line chemotherapy for advanced disease and 22 as third or subsequent lines. Median follow up was 6.1 months. The best achieved objective tumour response rate was 29% (11 partial responses 95% confidence interval [CI] = 15–46%). 20 patients (52.6%) had stable disease. The median duration of response was 3.9 months. Even for patients who had previously received both 5-FU and irinotecan (n= 22), 27.3% had partial response with oxaliplatin and PVI 5-FU. 37 patients had symptoms on entry into the study. 25 patients had pain, 10 had anorexia and 28 had lethargy. 64%, 70% and 17.9% had symptomatic improvement after treatment respectively. Grade 3–4 toxicities were anaemia 10.6%, neutropenia 2.6%, thrombocytopenia 5.2%, diarrhoea 18.9%, nausea and vomiting 2.7%, infection 5.4% and lethargy 37.8%. The median survival was 9.1 months. Probability of overall survival at 6 months was 58.4% (95% CI = 38.7–73.7%). The median failure-free survival was 4 months. Oxaliplatin and PVI 5FU is an active and well tolerated regimen in patients with heavily pre-treated advanced colorectal cancer. © 2001 Cancer Research Campaig

    Phase II randomised trial of chemoradiotherapy with FOLFOX4 or cisplatin plus fluorouracil in oesophageal cancer

    Get PDF
    International audienceBackground: Concurrent chemoradiotherapy is a valuable treatment option for localised oesophageal cancer (EC), but improvement is still needed. A randomised phase II trial was initiated to assess the feasibility and efficacy in terms of the endoscopic complete response rate (ECRR) of radiotherapy with oxaliplatin, leucovorin and fluorouracil (FOLFOX4) or cisplatin/fluorouracil. Methods: Patients with unresectable EC (any T, any N, M0 or M1a), or medically unfit for surgery, were randomly assigned to receive either six cycles (three concomitant and three post-radiotherapy) of FOLFOX4 (arm A) or four cycles (two concomitant and two post-radiotherapy) of cisplatin/fluorouracil (arm B) along with radiotherapy 50 Gy in both arms. Responses were reviewed by independent experts. Results: A total of 97 patients were randomised (arm A/B, 53/44) and 95 were assessable. The majority had squamous cell carcinoma (82%; arm A/B, 42/38). Chemoradiotherapy was completed in 74 and 66%. The ECRR was 45 and 29% in arms A and B, respectively. Median times to progression were 15.2 and 9.2 months and the median overall survival was 22.7 and 15.1 months in arms A and B, respectively. Conclusion: Chemoradiotherapy with FOLFOX4, a well-tolerated and convenient combination with promising efficacy, is now being tested in a phase III trial

    Tumor marker utility and prognostic relevance of cathepsin B, cathepsin L, urokinase-type plasminogen activator, plasminogen activator inhibitor type-1, CEA and CA 19-9 in colorectal cancer

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Cathepsin B and L (CATB, CATL), urokinase-type plasminogen activator (uPA) and its inhibitor PAI-1 play an important role in colorectal cancer invasion. The tumor marker utility and prognostic relevance of these proteases have not been evaluated in the same experimental setting and compared with that of CEA and CA-19-9.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Protease, CEA and CA 19-9 serum or plasma levels were determined in 56 patients with colorectal cancer, 25 patients with ulcerative colitis, 26 patients with colorectal adenomas and 35 tumor-free control patients. Protease, CEA, CA 19-9 levels have been determined by ELISA and electrochemiluminescence immunoassay, respectively; their sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic accuracy have been calculated and correlated with clinicopathological staging.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The protease antigen levels were significantly higher in colorectal cancer compared with other groups. Sensitivity of PAI-1 (94%), CATB (82%), uPA (69%), CATL (41%) were higher than those of CEA or CA 19-9 (30% and 18%, respectively). PAI-1, CATB and uPA demonstrated a better accuracy than CEA or CA 19-9. A combination of PAI-1 with CATB or uPA exhibited the highest sensitivity value (98%). High CATB, PAI-1, CEA and CA 19-9 levels correlated with advanced Dukes stages. CATB (<it>P </it>= 0.0004), CATL (<it>P </it>= 0.02), PAI-1 (<it>P </it>= 0.01) and CA 19-9 (<it>P </it>= 0.004) had a significant prognostic impact. PAI-1 (<it>P </it>= 0.001), CATB (<it>P </it>= 0.04) and CA 19-9 (<it>P </it>= 0.02) proved as independent prognostic variables.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>At the time of clinical detection proteases are more sensitive indicators for colorectal cancer than the commonly used tumor markers. Determinations of CATB, CATL and PAI-1 have a major prognostic impact in patients with colorectal cancer.</p

    Definition, diagnosis and treatment of oligometastatic oesophagogastric cancer: A Delphi consensus study in Europe.

    Get PDF
    Local treatment improves the outcomes for oligometastatic disease (OMD, i.e. an intermediate state between locoregional and widespread disseminated disease). However, consensus about the definition, diagnosis and treatment of oligometastatic oesophagogastric cancer is lacking. The aim of this study was to develop a multidisciplinary European consensus statement on the definition, diagnosis and treatment of oligometastatic oesophagogastric cancer. In total, 65 specialists in the multidisciplinary treatment for oesophagogastric cancer from 49 expert centres across 16 European countries were requested to participate in this Delphi study. The consensus finding process consisted of a starting meeting, 2 online Delphi questionnaire rounds and an online consensus meeting. Input for Delphi questionnaires consisted of (1) a systematic review on definitions of oligometastatic oesophagogastric cancer and (2) a discussion of real-life clinical cases by multidisciplinary teams. Experts were asked to score each statement on a 5-point Likert scale. The agreement was scored to be either absent/poor (&lt;50%), fair (50%-75%) or consensus (≥75%). A total of 48 experts participated in the starting meeting, both Delphi rounds, and the consensus meeting (overall response rate: 71%). OMD was considered in patients with metastatic oesophagogastric cancer limited to 1 organ with ≤3 metastases or 1 extra-regional lymph node station (consensus). In addition, OMD was considered in patients without progression at restaging after systemic therapy (consensus). For patients with synchronous or metachronous OMD with a disease-free interval ≤2 years, systemic therapy followed by restaging to consider local treatment was considered as treatment (consensus). For metachronous OMD with a disease-free interval &gt;2 years, either upfront local treatment or systemic treatment followed by restaging was considered as treatment (fair agreement). The OMEC project has resulted in a multidisciplinary European consensus statement for the definition, diagnosis and treatment of oligometastatic oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma and squamous cell cancer. This can be used to standardise inclusion criteria for future clinical trials

    A case-only study to identify genetic modifiers of breast cancer risk for BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation carriers

    Get PDF
    Breast cancer (BC) risk for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers varies by genetic and familial factors. About 50 common variants have been shown to modify BC risk for mutation carriers. All but three, were identified in general population studies. Other mutation carrier-specific susceptibility variants may exist but studies of mutation carriers have so far been underpowered. We conduct a novel case-only genome-wide association study comparing genotype frequencies between 60,212 general population BC cases and 13,007 cases with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. We identify robust novel associations for 2 variants with BC for BRCA1 and 3 for BRCA2 mutation carriers, P &lt; 10−8, at 5 loci, which are not associated with risk in the general population. They include rs60882887 at 11p11.2 where MADD, SP11 and EIF1, genes previously implicated in BC biology, are predicted as potential targets. These findings will contribute towards customising BC polygenic risk scores for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers

    The FANCM:p.Arg658* truncating variant is associated with risk of triple-negative breast cancer

    Get PDF
    Breast cancer is a common disease partially caused by genetic risk factors. Germline pathogenic variants in DNA repair genes BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, ATM, and CHEK2 are associated with breast cancer risk. FANCM, which encodes for a DNA translocase, has been proposed as a breast cancer predisposition gene, with greater effects for the ER-negative and triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) subtypes. We tested the three recurrent protein-truncating variants FANCM:p.Arg658*, p.Gln1701*, and p.Arg1931* for association with breast cancer risk in 67,112 cases, 53,766 controls, and 26,662 carriers of pathogenic variants of BRCA1 or BRCA2. These three variants were also studied functionally by measuring survival and chromosome fragility in FANCM (-/-) patient-derived immortalized fibroblasts treated with diepoxybutane or olaparib. We observed that FANCM:p.Arg658* was associated with increased risk of ER-negative disease and TNBC (OR = 2.44, P = 0.034 and OR = 3.79; P = 0.009, respectively). In a country-restricted analysis, we confirmed the associations detected for FANCM:p.Arg658* and found that also FANCM:p.Arg1931* was associated with ER-negative breast cancer risk (OR = 1.96; P = 0.006). The functional results indicated that all three variants were deleterious affecting cell survival and chromosome stability with FANCM:p.Arg658* causing more severe phenotypes. In conclusion, we confirmed that the two rare FANCM deleterious variants p.Arg658* and p.Arg1931* are risk factors for ER-negative and TNBC subtypes. Overall our data suggest that the effect of truncating variants on breast cancer risk may depend on their position in the gene. Cell sensitivity to olaparib exposure, identifies a possible therapeutic option to treat FANCM-associated tumors

    The FANCM:p.Arg658* truncating variant is associated with risk of triple-negative breast cancer

    Get PDF
    Breast cancer is a common disease partially caused by genetic risk factors. Germline pathogenic variants in DNA repair genes BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, ATM, and CHEK2 are associated with breast cancer risk. FANCM, which encodes for a DNA translocase, has been proposed as a breast cancer predisposition gene, with greater effects for the ER-negative and triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) subtypes. We tested the three recurrent protein-truncating variants FANCM:p.Arg658*, p.Gln1701*, and p.Arg1931* for association with breast cancer risk in 67,112 cases, 53,766 controls, and 26,662 carriers of pathogenic variants of BRCA1 or BRCA2. These three variants were also studied functionally by measuring survival and chromosome fragility in FANCM−/− patient-derived immortalized fibroblasts treated with diepoxybutane or olaparib. We observed that FANCM:p.Arg658* was associated with increased risk of ER-negative disease and TNBC (OR = 2.44, P = 0.034 and OR = 3.79; P = 0.009, respectively). In a country-restricted analysis, we confirmed the associations detected for FANCM:p.Arg658* and found that also FANCM:p.Arg1931* was associated with ER-negative breast cancer risk (OR = 1.96; P = 0.006). The functional results indicated that all three variants were deleterious affecting cell survival and chromosome stability with FANCM:p.Arg658* causing more severe phenotypes. In conclusion, we confirmed that the two rare FANCM deleterious variants p.Arg658* and p.Arg1931* are risk factors for ER-negative and TNBC subtypes. Overall our data suggest that the effect of truncating variants on breast cancer risk may depend on their position in the gene. Cell sensitivity to olaparib exposure, identifies a possible therapeutic option to treat FANCM-associated tumors
    corecore