Intensive induction chemotherapy with C-BOP/BEP for intermediate- and poor-risk metastatic germ cell tumours (EORTC trial 30948)

New chemotherapy regimens are continuously explored in patients with high-risk malignant germ cell tumours (MGCTs). This multicentre phase II trial assessed the efficacy and toxicity of C-BOP/BEP chemotherapy in intermediate and poor prognosis MGCT (IGCCCG criteria). C-BOP/BEP treatment consisted of cycles of cisplatin, vincristine, bleomycin and carboplatin, followed by one cycle of vincristine and bleomycin and three cycles of BEP (bleomycon, etoposide, cisplatin). The trial was designed to demonstrate a 1-year progression-free survival rate of 80%, that is, to exclude a 1-year rate of 70% or less, with a one-sided significance level of 5%. Secondary end points included toxicity, overall survival and the postchemotherapy complete response rate. In total, 16 European hospitals entered 66 eligible patients (intermediate prognosis group: 37; poor prognosis group: 29). A total of 45 patients (68.2%, 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 56.9–79.4%) achieved a complete response (intermediate prognosis: 30; poor prognosis: 15). After a median observation time of 40.4 months (range: 13.7–66.3), the 1-year progression-free survival rate was 81.8% 95% CI: 72.5–91.1%). The 2-year overall survival was 84.5% (95% CI: 75.6–93.3%). In all, 51 patients experienced at least one episode of WHO grade 3/4 leucopenia, and at least one event of grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia occurred in 30 patients. There was no toxic death. With an 82% 1-year progression-free survival and a lower limit of the 95% CI above 70%, the efficacy of C-BOP/BEP is comparable to that of published alternative chemotherapy schedules in high-risk MGCT patients. The treatment's toxicity is manageable in a multicentre setting. In poor prognosis patients, C-BOP/BEP should be compared to standard chemotherapy of four cycles of BEP

The Evolution of the Silver Hills Volcanic Center, and Revised 40Ar/39Ar Geochronology of Montserrat, Lesser Antilles, With Implications for Island Arc Volcanism

Studying the older volcanic centers on Montserrat, Centre Hills and Silver Hills, may reveal how volcanic activity can change over long time periods (≥1 Myr), and whether the recent activity at the Soufrière Hills is typical of volcanism throughout Montserrat's history. Here, we present the first detailed mapping of the Silver Hills, the oldest and arguably least studied volcanic center on Montserrat. Volcanism at the Silver Hills was dominated by episodic andesite lava dome growth and collapse, produced Vulcanian style eruptions, and experienced periodic sector collapse events, similar to the style of volcanic activity that has been documented for the Centre Hills and Soufrière Hills. We also present an updated geochronology of volcanism on Montserrat, by revising existing ages and obtaining new 40Ar/39Ar dates and palaeomagnetic ages from marine tephra layers. We show that the centers of the Silver, Centre, and Soufrière Hills were active during at least ∼2.17–1.03 Ma, ∼1.14–0.38 Ma, and ∼0.45 Ma–present, respectively. Combined with timings of volcanism on Basse-Terre, Guadeloupe these ages suggest that ∼0.5–1 Ma is a common lifespan for volcanic centers in the Lesser Antilles. These new dates identify a previously unrecognized overlap in activity between the different volcanic centers, which appears to be a common phenomenon in island arcs. We also identify an older stage of Soufrière Hills activity ∼450–290 ka characterized by the eruption of hornblende-orthopyroxene-phyric lavas, demonstrating that the petrology of the Soufrière Hills eruptive products has changed at least twice throughout the volcano's development

Submarine record of volcanic island construction and collapse in the Lesser Antilles arc: First scientific drilling of submarine volcanic island landslides by IODP Expedition 340

IODP Expedition 340 successfully drilled a series of sites offshore Montserrat, Martinique and Dominica in the Lesser Antilles from March to April 2012. These are among the few drill sites gathered around volcanic islands, and the first scientific drilling of large and likely tsunamigenic volcanic island-arc landslide deposits. These cores provide evidence and tests of previous hypotheses for the composition and origin of those deposits. Sites U1394, U1399, and U1400 that penetrated landslide deposits recovered exclusively seafloor-sediment, comprising mainly turbidites and hemipelagic deposits, and lacked debris avalanche deposits. This supports the concepts that i/ volcanic debris avalanches tend to stop at the slope break, and ii/ widespread and voluminous failures of pre-existing low-gradient seafloor sediment can be triggered by initial emplacement of material from the volcano. Offshore Martinique (U1399 and 1400), the landslide deposits comprised blocks of parallel strata that were tilted or micro-faulted, sometimes separated by intervals of homogenized sediment (intense shearing), while Site U1394 offshore Montserrat penetrated a flat-lying block of intact strata. The most likely mechanism for generating these large-scale seafloor-sediment failures appears to be propagation of a decollement from proximal areas loaded and incised by a volcanic debris avalanche. These results have implications for the magnitude of tsunami generation. Under some conditions, volcanic island landslide deposits comprised of mainly seafloor sediment will tend to form smaller magnitude tsunamis than equivalent volumes of subaerial block-rich mass flows rapidly entering water. Expedition 340 also successfully drilled sites to access the undisturbed record of eruption fallout layers intercalated with marine sediment which provide an outstanding high-resolution dataset to analyze eruption and landslides cycles, improve understanding of magmatic evolution as well as offshore sedimentation processes. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved

Ribociclib as First-Line Therapy for HR-Positive, Advanced Breast Cancer

The inhibition of cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6 (CDK4/6) could potentially overcome or delay resistance to endocrine therapy in advanced breast cancer that is positive for hormone receptor (HR) and negative for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2). In this randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of the selective CDK4/6 inhibitor ribociclib combined with letrozole for first-line treatment in 668 postmenopausal women with HR-positive, HER2-negative recurrent or metastatic breast cancer who had not received previous systemic therapy for advanced disease. We randomly assigned the patients to receive either ribociclib (600 mg per day on a 3-weeks-on, 1-week-off schedule) plus letrozole (2.5 mg per day) or placebo plus letrozole. The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival. Secondary end points included overall survival, overall response rate, and safety. A preplanned interim analysis was performed on January 29, 2016, after 243 patients had disease progression or died. Prespecified criteria for superiority required a hazard ratio of 0.56 or less with P The duration of progression-free survival was significantly longer in the ribociclib group than in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.72; P=3.29×10-6 for superiority). The median duration of follow-up was 15.3 months. After 18 months, the progression-free survival rate was 63.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 54.6 to 70.3) in the ribociclib group and 42.2% (95% CI, 34.8 to 49.5) in the placebo group. In patients with measurable disease at baseline, the overall response rate was 52.7% and 37.1%, respectively (P Among patients receiving initial systemic treatment for HR-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer, the duration of progression-free survival was significantly longer among those receiving ribociclib plus letrozole than among those receiving placebo plus letrozole, with a higher rate of myelosuppression in the ribociclib group. (Funded by Novartis Pharmaceuticals; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01958021 .)

PI3K inhibitors as new cancer therapeutics: implications for clinical trial design

Cristian Massacesi,1 Emmanuelle Di Tomaso,2 Patrick Urban,3 Caroline Germa,4 Cornelia Quadt,5 Lucia Trandafir,1 Paola Aimone,3 Nathalie Fretault,1 Bharani Dharan,4 Ranjana Tavorath,4 Samit Hirawat4 1Novartis Oncology, Paris, France; 2Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research Inc, Cambridge, MA, USA; 3Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland; 4Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, East Hanover, NJ, USA; 5Novartis Pharmaceuticals KK, Tokyo, Japan Abstract: The PI3K–AKT–mTOR pathway is frequently activated in cancer. PI3K inhibitors, including the pan-PI3K inhibitor buparlisib (BKM120) and the PI3Kα-selective inhibitor alpelisib (BYL719), currently in clinical development by Novartis Oncology, may therefore be effective as anticancer agents. Early clinical studies with PI3K inhibitors have demonstrated preliminary antitumor activity and acceptable safety profiles. However, a number of unanswered questions regarding PI3K inhibition in cancer remain, including: what is the best approach for different tumor types, and which biomarkers will accurately identify the patient populations most likely to benefit from specific PI3K inhibitors? This review summarizes the strategies being employed by Novartis Oncology to help maximize the benefits of clinical studies with buparlisib and alpelisib, including stratification according to PI3K pathway activation status, selective enrollment/target enrichment (where patients with PI3K pathway-activated tumors are specifically recruited), nonselective enrollment with mandatory tissue collection, and enrollment of patients who have progressed on previous targeted agents, such as mTOR inhibitors or endocrine therapy. An overview of Novartis-sponsored and Novartis-supported trials that are utilizing these approaches in a range of cancer types, including breast cancer, head and neck squamous cell carcinoma, non-small cell lung carcinoma, lymphoma, and glioblastoma multiforme, is also described. Keywords: PI3K–AKT–mTOR pathway, patient selection, biomarkers, PI3K inhibitors, clinical trial desig

Randomized Phase III Study Comparing Paclitaxel-Bleomycin, Etoposide, and Cisplatin (BEP) to Standard BEP in Intermediate-Prognosis Germ-Cell Cancer: Intergroup Study EORTC 30983

Purpose To compare the efficacy of four cycles of paclitaxel-bleomycin, etoposide, and cisplatin (T-BEP) to four cycles of bleomycin, etoposide, and cisplatin (BEP) in previously untreated patients with intermediate-prognosis germ-cell cancer (GCC). Patients and Methods Patients were randomly assigned to receive either T-BEP or standard BEP. Patients assigned to the T-BEP group received paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) in a 3-hour infusion. Patients who were administered T-BEP received primary granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) prophylaxis. The study was designed as a randomized open-label phase II/III study. To show a 10% improvement in 3-year progression-free survival (PFS), the study aimed to recruit 498 patients but closed with 337 patients as a result of Results Accrual was from November 1998 to April 2009. A total of 169 patients were administered BEP, and 168 patients were administered T-BEP. Thirteen patients in both arms were ineligible, mainly as a result of a good prognosis of GCC (eight patients administered BEP; six patients administered T-BEP) or a poor prognosis of GCC (one patient administered BEP; four patients administered T-BEP). PFS at 3 years (intent to treat) was 79.4% in the T-BEP group versus 71.1% in the BEP group (hazard ratio [HR], Conclusion T-BEP administered with G-CSF seems to be a safe and effective treatment regimen for patients with intermediate-prognosis GCC. However, the study recruited a smaller-than-planned number of patients and included 7.7% ineligible patients. The primary analysis of the trial could not demonstrate statistical superiority of T-BEP for PFS. When ineligible patients were excluded, the analysis of all eligible patients demonstrated a 12% superior 3-year PFS with T-BEP, which was statistically significant

Randomized phase III study comparing paclitaxel-bleomycin, etoposide, and cisplatin (BEP) to standard BEP in intermediate-prognosis germ-cell cancer: Intergroup study EORTC 30983

Purpose: To compare the efficacy of four cycles of paclitaxel-bleomycin, etoposide, and cisplatin (T-BEP) to four cycles of bleomycin, etoposide, and cisplatin (BEP) in previously untreated patients with intermediate-prognosis germ-cell cancer (GCC). Patients and Methods: Patients were randomly assigned to receive either T-BEP or standard BEP. Patients assigned to the T-BEP group received paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 in a 3-hour infusion. Patients who were administered T-BEP received primary granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) prophylaxis. The study was designed as a randomized open-label phase II/III study. To show a 10% improvement in 3-year progression-free survival (PFS), the study aimed to recruit 498 patients but closed with 337 patients as a result of slow accrual. Results: Accrual was from November 1998 to April 2009. A total of 169patients were administered BEP, and 168 patients were administered T-BEP. Thirteen patients in both arms were ineligible, mainly as a result of a good prognosis of GCC (eight patients administered BEP; six patients administered T-BEP) or a poor prognosis of GCC (one patient administered BEP; four patients administered T-BEP). PFS at 3 years (intent to treat) was 79.4% in the T-BEP group versus 71.1% in the BEP group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.73; CI, 0.47 to 1.13; P [log-rank test] = 0.153). PFS at 3 years in all eligible patients was 82.7% versus 70.1%, respectively (HR, 0.60; CI: 0.37 to 0.97) and was statistically significant (P = 0.03). Overall survival was not statistically different. Conclusion: T-BEP administered with G-CSF seems to be a safe and effective treatment regimen for patients with intermediate-prognosis GCC. However, the study recruited a smaller-than-planned number of patients and included 7.7% ineligible patients. The primary analysis of the trial could not demonstrate statistical superiority of T-BEP for PFS. When ineligible patients were excluded, the analysis of all eligible pat