Phase III, Randomized Study of Dual Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 (HER2) Blockade With Lapatinib Plus Trastuzumab in Combination With an Aromatase Inhibitor in Postmenopausal Women With HER2-Positive, Hormone Receptor-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer: ALTERNATIVE.

Purpose Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) targeting plus endocrine therapy (ET) improved clinical benefit in HER2-positive, hormone receptor (HR)-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC) versus ET alone. Dual HER2 blockade enhances clinical benefit versus single HER2 blockade. The ALTERNATIVE study evaluated the efficacy and safety of dual HER2 blockade plus aromatase inhibitor (AI) in postmenopausal women with HER2-positive/HR-positive MBC who received prior ET and prior neo(adjuvant)/first-line trastuzumab (TRAS) plus chemotherapy. Methods Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive lapatinib (LAP) + TRAS + AI, TRAS + AI, or LAP + AI. Patients for whom chemotherapy was intended were excluded. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS; investigator assessed) with LAP + TRAS + AI versus TRAS + AI. Secondary end points were PFS (comparison of other arms), overall survival, overall response rate, clinical benefit rate, and safety. Results Three hundred fifty-five patients were included in this analysis: LAP + TRAS + AI (n = 120), TRAS + AI (n = 117), and LAP + AI (n = 118). Baseline characteristics were balanced. The study met its primary end point; superior PFS was observed with LAP + TRAS + AI versus TRAS + AI (median PFS, 11 v 5.7 months; hazard ratio, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.45 to 0.88; P = .0064). Consistent PFS benefit was observed in predefined subgroups. Overall response rate, clinical benefit rate, and overall survival also favored LAP + TRAS + AI. The median PFS with LAP + AI versus TRAS + AI was 8.3 versus 5.7 months (hazard ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.98; P = .0361). Common adverse events (AEs; ≥ 15%) with LAP + TRAS + AI, TRAS + AI, and LAP + AI were diarrhea (69%, 9%, and 51%, respectively), rash (36%, 2%, and 28%, respectively), nausea (22%, 9%, and 22%, respectively), and paronychia (30%, 0%, and 15%, respectively), mostly grade 1 or 2. Serious AEs were reported similarly across the three groups, and AEs leading to discontinuation were lower with LAP + TRAS + AI. Conclusion Dual HER2 blockade with LAP + TRAS + AI showed superior PFS benefit versus TRAS + AI in patients with HER2-positive/HR-positive MBC. This combination offers an effective and safe chemotherapy-sparing alternative treatment regimen for this patient population

The Effect of Abemaciclib Plus Fulvestrant on Overall Survival in Hormone Receptor-Positive, ERBB2-Negative Breast Cancer That Progressed on Endocrine Therapy - MONARCH 2: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance: Statistically significant overall survival (OS) benefits of CDK4 and CDK6 inhibitors in combination with fulvestrant for hormone receptor (HR)-positive, ERBB2 (formerly HER2)-negative advanced breast cancer (ABC) in patients regardless of menopausal status after prior endocrine therapy (ET) has not yet been demonstrated. Objective: To compare the effect of abemaciclib plus fulvestrant vs placebo plus fulvestrant on OS at the prespecified interim of MONARCH 2 (338 events) in patients with HR-positive, ERBB2-negative advanced breast cancer that progressed during prior ET. Design, Setting, and Participants: MONARCH 2 was a global, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind phase 3 trial of abemaciclib plus fulvestrant vs placebo plus fulvestrant for treatment of premenopausal or perimenopausal women (with ovarian suppression) and postmenopausal women with HR-positive, ERBB2-negative ABC that progressed during ET. Patients were enrolled between August 7, 2014, and December 29, 2015. Analyses for this report were conducted at the time of database lock on June 20, 2019. Interventions: Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive abemaciclib or placebo, 150 mg, every 12 hours on a continuous schedule plus fulvestrant, 500 mg, per label. Randomization was stratified based on site of metastasis (visceral, bone only, or other) and resistance to prior ET (primary vs secondary). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival. Overall survival was a gated key secondary end point. The boundary P value for the interim analysis was.02. Results: Of 669 women enrolled, 446 (median [range] age, 59 [32-91] years) were randomized to the abemaciclib plus fulvestrant arm and 223 (median [range] age, 62 [32-87] years) were randomized to the placebo plus fulvestrant arm. At the prespecified interim, 338 deaths (77% of the planned 441 at the final analysis) were observed in the intent-to-treat population, with a median OS of 46.7 months for abemaciclib plus fulvestrant and 37.3 months for placebo plus fulvestrant (hazard ratio [HR], 0.757; 95% CI, 0.606-0.945; P =.01). Improvement in OS was consistent across all stratification factors. Among stratification factors, more pronounced effects were observed in patients with visceral disease (HR, 0.675; 95% CI, 0.511-0.891) and primary resistance to prior ET (HR, 0.686; 95% CI, 0.451-1.043). Time to second disease progression (median, 23.1 months vs 20.6 months), time to chemotherapy (median, 50.2 months vs 22.1 months), and chemotherapy-free survival (median, 25.5 months vs 18.2 months) were also statistically significantly improved in the abemaciclib arm vs placebo arm. No new safety signals were observed for abemaciclib. Conclusions and Relevance: Treatment with abemaciclib plus fulvestrant resulted in a statistically significant and clinically meaningful median OS improvement of 9.4 months for patients with HR-positive, ERBB2-negative ABC who progressed after prior ET regardless of menopausal status. Abemaciclib substantially delayed the receipt of subsequent chemotherapy

РЕЗУЛЬТАТЫ МНОГОЦЕНТРОВОГО ДВОЙНОГО СЛЕПОГО РАНДОМИЗИРОВАННОГО КЛИНИЧЕСКОГО ИССЛЕДОВАНИЯ ПЕРВОЙ ФАЗЫ ПРЕПАРАТА BCD-022 ПО СРАВНЕНИЮ С ПРЕПАРАТОМ ГЕРЦЕПТИН®, ПРИМЕНЯЕМЫХ В СОЧЕТАНИИ С ПАКЛИТАКСЕЛОМ У БОЛЬНЫХ МЕТАСТАТИЧЕСКИМ РАКОМ МОЛОЧНОЙ ЖЕЛЕЗЫ

Within the framework of multicenter double-blind randomized clinical trial studied pharmacokinetics and safety of BCD-022 (trastuzumab, "Biocad" company, Russia), compared with the drug Herceptin (trastuzumab, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd., Switzerland). Evaluation of the effectiveness was not the aim of the interim analysis, the results of which are shown. BCD-022 and Herceptin were used in combination with paclitaxel in patients with metastatic breast cancer with HER2 overexpressing (HER2 (+), mBC).Methods. The analysis included 46 patients with HER2 (+) metastatic breast cancer (mBC) at the age of 29 to 71 years (22 - in the group of studied drug BCD-022 and 24 - in the Herceptin group). All patients received one course of therapy of BCD-022 or Herceptin 8 mg/kg intravenously and paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 of a three-week course of treatment and continue to receive treatment with the same scheme with the use of trastuzumab 6 mg/kg (mandatory in the study is to conduct 6 courses of therapy). Randomization was carried out in groups in a ratio of 1: 1. The primary endpoint of pharmacokinetics evaluation was the area under the curve "concentration-time» (AUC0-504) of trastuzumab after a single application, the secondary - Cmax, T1 / 2 and Tmax. Safety was assessed based on the incidence of adverse events after the first course of therapy.Results. Haematological toxicity, myalgia and arthralgia were the most frequent adverse events. Most reported adverse events had mild to moderate grade according to CTCA 4.03 and were caused  by effect of myelosuppressive chemotherapy. There were no statistically significant differences in adverse events frequency between the groups. There were 6 serious adverse events: 2 - in the BCD-022 group and 4 - in the Herceptin group. All pharmacokinetic parameters, including the primary endpoint (AUC 0-504) and secondary endpoints (Cmax, T1 / 2 and Tmax), of studied drug BCD-022 and Herceptin had no statistically significant difference.Conclusion. BCD-022 (trastuzumab, "Biocad" company, Russia) regarding to its safety profile and pharmacokinetic properties is fully consistent with the original drug trastuzumab Herceptin (F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd., Switzerland) and can be recommended for further clinical study.В рамках многоцентрового двойного слепого рандомизированного клинического исследования была изучена фармакокинетика и безопасность препарата BCD-022 (трастузумаб, ЗАО «БИОКАД», Россия) по сравнению с препаратом Герцептин® (трастузумаб, Ф. Хоффманн-Ля Рош Лтд, Швейцария). Оценка эффективности не входила в задачи промежуточного анализа, результаты которого представлены. BCD-022 и Герцептин® применялись в комбинации с паклитакселом у пациенток метастатическим раком молочной железы с гиперэкспрессией HER2 (HER2 (+) мРМЖ).Методы. В анализ включено 46 больных HER2 (+) мРМЖ в возрасте от 29 до 71 года (22 — в группу исследуемого препарата BCD-022, 24 — в группу Герцептин®). Все пациентки получили 1 курс терапии по схеме BCD-022 или Герцептин® 8 мг/кг внутривенно капельно и паклитаксел 175 мг/м2 внутривенно в 1 день трехнедельного курса и продолжают лечение по той же схеме с использованием трастузумаба в дозе 6 мг/кг (обязательным в исследовании является проведение 6 курсов терапии). Рандомизация в группы производилась в соотношении 1:1. Первичной конечной точкой для оценки фармакокинетики была площадь под кривой «концентрация-время» (AUC0–504) трастузумаба после однократного применения, вторичными — Cmax, T1/2 и Tmax. Безопасность оценивалась на основании частоты нежелательных явлений после первого курса терапии.Результаты. Среди нежелательных явлений наиболее часто встречалась гематологическая токсичность, миалгия, артралгия. Большинство зарегистрированных нежелательных явлений имели легкую и умеренную степень по СТСАЕ 4.03 и были обусловлены проведением миелосупрессивной химиотерапии. Статистически значимых различий между группами не было выявлено ни по одному из нежелательных явлений. Зарегистрировано 6 серьезных нежелательных явлений: 2 — в группе исследуемого препарата BCD-022 и 4 — в группе Герцептин®. Все фармакокинетические показатели, включая первичную конечную точку (AUC0–504) и вторичные конечные точки (Cmax, T1/2 и Tmax), исследуемого препарата BCD-022 и Герцептин® не имели статистически значимых отличий.Заключение. BCD-022 (трастузумаб, ЗАО «БИОКАД», Россия) по своему профилю безопасности и фармакокинетическим свойствам полностью соответствует оригинальному препарату трастузумаба Герцептин® (Ф. Хоффманн-Ля Рош Лтд, Швейцария) и может быть рекомендован для дальнейшего клинического изучения

Rituximab biosimilar RTXM83 versus reference rituximab in combination with CHOP as first-line treatment for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: a randomized, double-blind study

This multicenter, double-blind, randomized study compared the efficacy, pharmacokinetics (PKs)/pharmacodynamics (PDs), safety and immunogenicity profile of RTXM83 vs. reference rituximab (R-rituximab), both with CHOP, as first-line treatment of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). A total of 272 patients <65 years of age, with good prognosis (136 per arm) were randomized (1:1) to receive six cycles of either RTXM83 or R-rituximab. The primary efficacy endpoint was achieved (overall response rate of 83.6% for RTXM83 and 82.9% for R-rituximab) with a difference 0.7% between arms (95%CI: [-8.77% to 10.17%]) fulfilling the predefined non-inferiority margin (-13%). Similar number of patients reported at least one adverse event (AE) (131 per arm) or one serious AE (47 with RTXM83 and 45 with R-rituximab). Anti-drug antibody development was comparable between the arms. PK/PD secondary endpoint results support similarity between the compounds. RTXM83 exhibits non-inferior efficacy and similar safety/immunogenicity to R-rituximab, being an accessible alternative for the treatment of patients with previously untreated DLBCL

Talactoferrin alfa versus placebo in patients with refractory advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (FORTIS-M trial)

Background: Talactoferrin alfa is an oral dendritic cell (DC)-mediated immunotherapy (DCMI). We tested whether talactoferrin was superior to placebo in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients and methods: An FORTIS-M trial was an international, multicenter, randomized, double-blind comparison of talactoferrin (1.5 g p.o. BID) versus placebo BID, in patients with stage IIIB/IV NSCLC whose disease had failed two or more prior regimens. Treatment was administered for a maximum of five 14-week cycles. The primary efficacy end point was overall survival (OS); secondary end points included 6- and 12-month survival, progression-free survival (PFS), and disease control rate (DCR). Results: Seven hundred and forty-two patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to talactoferrin (497) or placebo (245). The median OS in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population was 7.66 months in the placebo arm and 7.49 months in the talactoferrin arm [hazard ratio (HR), 1.04; 95% CI, 0.873-1.24; P = 0.6602]. The 6-month survival rates were 59.9% (95% CI, 53.4% to 65.8%) and 55.7% (95% CI, 51.1% to 59.9%), respectively. The 12-month survival rates were 32.2% (95% CI, 26.3% to 38.2%) and 30.9% (95% CI, 26.8% to 35%), respectively. The median PFS rates were 1.64 months and 1.68 months, respectively (HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.835-1.16; P = 0.8073). The DCRs were 38.4 and 37.6%, respectively [stratified odds ratio (OR), 0.96; 95% CI, 0.698-1.33; P = 0.8336]. The safety profiles were comparable between arms. Conclusions: There was no improvement in efficacy with talactoferrin alfa in patients with advanced NSCLC whose disease had failed two or more previous regimens. © The Author 2013. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology All rights reserved