Safety and efficacy of atezolizumab in patients with autoimmune disease: subgroup analysis of the SAUL study in locally advanced/metastatic urinary tract carcinoma

Aim Patients with pre-existing autoimmune disease (AID) are typically excluded from clinical trials of immune checkpoint inhibitors, and there are limited data on outcomes in this population. The single-arm international SAUL study of atezolizumab enrolled a broader ‘real-world’ patient population. We present outcomes in patients with a history of AID. Methods Patients with locally advanced/metastatic urinary tract carcinoma received atezolizumab 1200 mg every 3 weeks until loss of clinical benefit or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end-point was safety. Overall survival (OS) was a secondary end-point. Subgroup analyses of AID patients were prespecified. Results Thirty-five of 997 treated patients had AID at baseline, most commonly psoriasis ( n = 15). Compared with non-AID patients, AID patients experienced numerically more adverse events (AEs) of special interest (46% versus 30%; grade ≥3 14% versus 6%) and treatment-related grade 3/4 AEs (26% versus 12%), but without relevant increases in treatment-related deaths (0% versus 1%) or AEs necessitating treatment discontinuation (9% versus 6%). Pre-existing AID worsened in four patients (11%; two flares in two patients); three of the six flares resolved, one was resolving, and two were unresolved. Efficacy was similar in AID and non-AID patients (median OS, 8.2 versus 8.8 months, respectively; median progression-free survival, 4.4 versus 2.2 months; disease control rate, 51% versus 39%). Conclusions In 35 atezolizumab-treated patients with pre-existing AID, incidences of special- interest and treatment-related AEs appeared acceptable. AEs were manageable, rarely requiring atezolizumab discontinuation. Treating these patients requires caution, but pre-existing AID does not preclude atezolizumab therapy

Final results of the TANIA randomised phase III trial of bevacizumab after progression on first-line bevacizumab therapy for HER2-negative locally recurrent/metastatic breast cancer

BACKGROUND: The randomised phase III TANIA trial demonstrated that continuing bevacizumab with second-line chemotherapy for locally recurrent/metastatic breast cancer (LR/mBC) after progression on first-line bevacizumab-containing therapy significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared with chemotherapy alone (hazard ratio [HR]=0.75, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.61-0.93). We report final results from the TANIA trial, including overall survival (OS) and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with HER2-negative LR/mBC that had progressed on or after first-line bevacizumab plus chemotherapy were randomised to receive standard second-line chemotherapy either alone or with bevacizumab. At second progression, patients initially randomised to bevacizumab continued bevacizumab with their third-line chemotherapy but those randomised to chemotherapy alone were not allowed to cross over to receive third-line bevacizumab. The primary end point was second-line PFS; secondary end points included third-line PFS, combined second- and third-line PFS, OS, HRQoL and safety. RESULTS: Of the 494 patients randomised, 483 received second-line therapy; 234 patients (47% of the randomised population) continued to third-line study treatment. The median duration of follow-up at the final analysis was 32.1 months in the chemotherapy-alone arm and 30.9 months in the bevacizumab plus chemotherapy arm. There was no statistically significant difference between treatment arms in third-line PFS (HR=0.79, 95% CI 0.59-1.06), combined second- and third-line PFS (HR=0.85, 95% CI 0.68-1.05) or OS (HR=0.96, 95% CI 0.76-1.21). Third-line safety results showed increased incidences of proteinuria and hypertension with bevacizumab, consistent with safety results for the second-line treatment phase. No differences in HRQoL were detected. CONCLUSION: In this trial, continuing bevacizumab beyond first and second progression of LR/mBC improved second-line PFS but no improvement in longer-term efficacy was observed. The second-line PFS benefit appears to be achieved without detrimentally affecting quality of life. CLINICALTRIALSGOV: NCT01250379

Extended remission of metastatic epithelioid angiosarcoma of the heart with liposomal doxorubicin

Angiosarcoma is the most common primary malignant tumour of the heart. It is a rare and aggressive neoplasm that almost always has a short and fatal evolution. By the time it produces symptoms it has usually progressed to a mass causing haemodynamic compromise. Initial presentation with metastatic disease is unusual. We report the case of a 72-year-old man who presented with painful skin lesions on both hands. The skin biopsy was diagnosed as intravascular metastasis of epithelioid angiosarcoma. Body computed tomography scan disclosed a solid mass in the left atrium. The tumour was judged unresectable and the patient was treated with systemic chemotherapy, consisting of liposomal doxorubicin, which resulted in a complete clinical response. The patient remains free of disease after 48 months of follow-up. The excellent clinical evolution of our patient verifies that liposomal doxorubicin may be effective in the treatment of these tumours and significantly prolong patients’ lifespan

Maintenance capecitabine and bevacizumab versus bevacizumab alone after initial first-line bevacizumab and docetaxel for patients with HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer (IMELDA): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial

Background Longer duration of first-line chemotherapy for patients with metastatic breast cancer is associated with prolonged overall survival and improved progression-free survival. We investigated capecitabine added to maintenance bevacizumab after initial treatment with bevacizumab and docetaxel in this setting. Methods We did this open-label randomised phase 3 trial at 54 hospitals in Brazil, China, Egypt, France, Hong Kong, India, Italy, Poland, Spain, and Turkey. We enrolled patients with HER2-negative measurable metastatic breast cancer; each received three to six cycles of first-line bevacizumab (15 mg/kg) and docetaxel (75\u2013100 mg/m2) every 3 weeks. Progression-free patients were randomly assigned with an interactive voice-response system by block (size four) randomisation (1:1) to receive either bevacizumab and capecitabine or bevacizumab only (bevacizumab 15 mg/kg on day 1; capecitabine 1000 mg/m2 twice per day on days 1\u201314, every 3 weeks) until progression, stratified by oestrogen receptor status (positive vs negative), visceral metastases (present vs absent), response status (stable disease vs response vs non-measurable), and lactate dehydrogenase concentration ( 641\ub75 vs >1\ub75 7 upper limit of normal). Neither patients nor investigators were masked to allocation. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (from randomisation) in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00929240. Findings Between July 16, 2009, and March 7, 2011 (when enrolment was prematurely terminated), 284 patients received initial bevacizumab and docetaxel; 185 (65%) were randomly assigned (91 to bevacizumab and capecitabine versus 94 to bevacizumab only). Progression-free survival was significantly longer in the bevacizumab and capecitabine group than in the bevacizumab only group (median 11\ub79 months [95% CI 9\ub78\u201315\ub74] vs 4\ub73 months [3\ub79\u20136\ub78]; stratified hazard ratio 0\ub738 [95% CI 0\ub727\u20130\ub755]; two-sided log-rank p<0\ub70001), as was overall survival (median 39\ub70 months [95% CI 32\ub73\u2013not reached] vs 23\ub77 months [18\ub75\u201331\ub77]; stratified HR 0\ub743 [95% CI 0\ub726\u20130\ub769]; two-sided log-rank p=0\ub70003). Results for time to progression were consistent with those for progression-free survival. 78 (86%) patients in the bevacizumab and capecitabine group and 72 (77%) in the bevacizumab only group had an objective response. Clinical benefit was recorded in 92 (98%) patients in the bevacizumab alone group and 90 (99%) in the bevacizumab and capecitabine group. Mean change from baseline in global health score did not differ significantly between groups. Grade 3 or worse adverse events during the maintenance phase were more common with bevacizumab and capecitabine than with bevacizumab only (45 [49%] of 91 patients vs 25 [27%] of 92 patients). The most common grade 3 or worse events were hand\u2013foot syndrome (28 [31%] in the bevacizumab and capecitabine group vs none in the bevacizumab alone group), hypertension (eight [9%] vs three [3%]), and proteinuria (three [3%] vs four [4%]). Serious adverse events were reported by ten (11%) patients in the bevacizumab and capecitabine group and seven (8%) patients in the bevacizumab only group. Interpretation Despite prematurely terminated accrual and the lack of information about post-progression treatment, both progression-free survival and overall survival were significantly improved with bevacizumab and capecitabine compared with bevacizumab alone as maintenance treatment. These results might inform future maintenance trials and current first-line treatment strategies for HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer