Current Practice of Airway Stenting in the Adult Population in Europe: A Survey of the European Association of Bronchology and Interventional Pulmonology (EABIP)

Background: Airway stenting (AS) commenced in Europe circa 1987 with the first placement of a dedicated silicone airway stent. Subsequently, over the last 3 decades, AS was spread throughout Europe, using different insertion techniques and different types of stents. Objectives: This study is an international survey conducted by the European Association of Bronchology and Interventional Pulmonology (EABIP) focusing on AS practice within 26 European countries. Methods: A questionnaire was sent to all EABIP National Delegates in February 2015. National delegates were responsible for obtaining precise and objective data regarding the current AS practice in their country. The deadline for data collection was February 2016. Results: France, Germany, and the UK are the 3 leading countries in terms of number of centres performing AS. These 3 nations represent the highest ranked nations within Europe in terms of gross national income. Overall, pulmonologists perform AS exclusively in 5 countries and predominately in 12. AS is performed almost exclusively in public hospitals. AS performed under general anaesthesia is the rule for the majority of institutions, and local anaesthesia is an alternative in 9 countries. Rigid bronchoscopy techniques are predominant in 20 countries. Amongst commercially available stents, both Dumon and Ultraflex are by far the most commonly deployed. Finally, 11 countries reported that AS is an economically viable activity, while 10 claimed that it is not. Conclusion: This EABIP survey demonstrates that there is significant heterogeneity in AS practice within Europe. Therapeutic bronchoscopy training and economic issues/reimbursement for procedures are likely to be the primary reasons explaining these findings. (C) 2017 S. Karger AG, Base

A Survey of the European Association of Bronchology and Interventional Pulmonology (EABIP)

Publisher Copyright: © Copyright 2017 S. Karger AG, Basel. All rights reserved.Background: Airway stenting (AS) commenced in Europe circa 1987 with the first placement of a dedicated silicone airway stent. Subsequently, over the last 3 decades, AS was spread throughout Europe, using different insertion techniques and different types of stents. Objectives: This study is an international survey conducted by the European Association of Bronchology and Interventional Pulmonology (EABIP) focusing on AS practice within 26 European countries. Methods: A questionnaire was sent to all EABIP National Delegates in February 2015. National delegates were responsible for obtaining precise and objective data regarding the current AS practice in their country. The deadline for data collection was February 2016. Results: France, Germany, and the UK are the 3 leading countries in terms of number of centres performing AS. These 3 nations represent the highest ranked nations within Europe in terms of gross national income. Overall, pulmonologists perform AS exclusively in 5 countries and predominately in 12. AS is performed almost exclusively in public hospitals. AS performed under general anaesthesia is the rule for the majority of institutions, and local anaesthesia is an alternative in 9 countries. Rigid bronchoscopy techniques are predominant in 20 countries. Amongst commercially available stents, both Dumon and Ultraflex are by far the most commonly deployed. Finally, 11 countries reported that AS is an economically viable activity, while 10 claimed that it is not. Conclusion: This EABIP survey demonstrates that there is significant heterogeneity in AS practice within Europe. Therapeutic bronchoscopy training and economic issues/reimbursement for procedures are likely to be the primary reasons explaining these findings.publishersversionpublishe

International, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blindphase III study of motesanib plus carboplatin/paclitaxel in patients with advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer: MONET1

Purpose We evaluated whether motesanib (a selective oral inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptors 1, 2, and 3; platelet-derived growth factor receptor; and Kit) combined with carboplatin/paclitaxel improved overall survival (OS) versus chemotherapy alone in patients with nonsquamous non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and in the subset of patients with adenocarcinoma. Patients and Methods Patients with stage IIIB/IV or recurrent nonsquamous NSCLC (no prior systemic therapy for advanced disease) were randomly assigned 1:1 to carboplatin (area under the curve, 6 mg/ml · min) and paclitaxel (200 mg/m2) intravenously for up to six 3-week cycles plus either motesanib 125 mg (arm A) or placebo (arm B) once daily orally. OS was the primary end point. Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), adverse events (AEs), and association between placental growth factor (PLGF) change and OS. Results A total of 1,090 patients with nonsquamous NSCLC were randomly assigned (arms A/B, n = 541 of 549); of those, 890 had adenocarcinoma (n = 448 of 442). Median OS in arms A and B was 13.0 and 11.0 months, respectively (hazard ratio [HR], 0.90; 95% CI, 0.78 to 1.04; P = .14); median OS for the adenocarcinoma subset was 13.5 and 11.0 months, respectively (HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.75 to 1.03; P = .11). In descriptive analyses (arms A v B), median PFS was 5.6 months versus 5.4 months (P = &lt; .001); ORR was 40% versus 26% (P &lt; .001). There was no association between PLGF change and OS in arm A. The incidence of grade ≥ 3 AEs (arms A and B, 73% and 59%, respectively) and grade 5 AEs (14% and 9%, respectively) was higher with motesanib treatment. Conclusion Motesanib plus carboplatin/paclitaxel did not significantly improve OS over carboplatin/paclitaxel alone in patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC or in the adenocarcinoma subset. </jats:sec

Effect of post-study immunotherapy (IO) on overall survival (OS) outcome in patients with metastatic (m) NSCLC treated with first-line durvalumab (D) vs chemotherapy (CT) in the phase III MYSTIC study.

n/

TG4010 immunotherapy and first-line chemotherapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (TIME): results from the phase 2b part of a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2b/3 trial.

Background: MUC1 is a tumour-associated antigen expressed by many solid tumours, including non-small-cell lung cancer. TG4010 is a modified vaccinia Ankara expressing MUC1 and interleukin 2. In a previous study, TG4010 combined with chemotherapy showed activity in non-small-cell lung cancer and the baseline value of CD16, CD56, CD69 triple-positive activated lymphocytes (TrPAL) was shown to be potentially predictive of TG4010 efficacy. In this phase 2b part of the phase 2b/3 TIME trial, we further assess TG4010 in combination with first-line chemotherapy and use of the TrPAL biomarker in this setting.Methods: In this phase 2b part of a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2b/3 trial, we recruited previously untreated patients aged 18 years or older with stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer without a known activating EGFR mutation and with MUC1 expression in at least 50% of tumoural cells. Patients were randomly allocated (1:1) by an external service provider to subcutaneous injections of 108 plaque-forming units of TG4010 or placebo from the beginning of chemotherapy every week for 6 weeks and then every 3 weeks up to progression, discontinuation for any reason, or toxic effects, stratified according to baseline value of TrPAL (? or &gt; the upper limit of normal [ULN]) and, in addition, a dynamic minimisation procedure was used, taking into account chemotherapy regimen, histology, addition or not of bevacizumab, performance status, and centre. Patients, site staff, monitors, the study funder, data managers, and the statistician were masked to treatment identity. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, assessed every 6 weeks, to validate the predictive value of the TrPAL biomarker. If patients with TrPAL values of less than or equal to the ULN had a Bayesian probability of more than 95% that the true hazard ratio (HR) for progression-free survival was less than 1, and if those with TrPAL values of greater than the ULN had a probability of more than 80% that the true HR for progression-free survival was more than 1, the TrPAL biomarker would be validated. We did primary analyses in the intention-to-treat population and safety analyses in those who had received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one valid post-baseline safety assessment. Monitors, site staff, and patients are still masked to treatment assignment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01383148.Findings: Between April 10, 2012, and Sept 12, 2014, we randomly allocated 222 patients (TG4010 and chemotherapy 111 [50%]; placebo and chemotherapy 111 [50%]). In the whole population, median progression-free survival was 5·9 months (95% CI 5·4–6·7) in the TG4010 group and 5·1 months (4·2–5·9) in the placebo group (HR 0·74 [95% CI 0·55–0·98]; one-sided p=0·019). In patients with TrPAL values of less than or equal to the ULN, the HR for progression-free survival was 0·75 (0·54–1·03); the posterior probability of the HR being less than 1 was 98·4%, and thus the primary endpoint was met. In patients with TrPAL values of greater than the ULN, the HR for progression-free survival was 0·77 (0·42–1·40); the posterior probability of the HR being greater than 1 was 31·3%, and the primary endpoint was not met. We noted grade 1–2 injection-site reactions in 36 (33%) of 110 patients in the TG4010 group versus four (4%) of 107 patients in the placebo group. We noted no grade 3 or 4 nor serious adverse events deemed to be related to TG4010 only. Four (4%) patients presented grade 3 or 4 adverse events related to TG4010 and other study treatments (chemotherapy or bevacizumab) versus 11 (10%) in the placebo group. No serious adverse event was related to the combination of TG4010 with other study treatments. The most frequent severe adverse events were neutropenia (grade 3 29 [26%], grade 4 13 [12%] in the TG4010 group vs grade 3 22 [21%], grade 4 11 [10%] in the placebo group), anaemia (grade 3 12 [11%] vs grade 3 16 [15%]), and fatigue (grade 3 12 [11%], grade 5 one [1%] vs grade 3 13 [12%]; no grade 4 events).Interpretation: TG4010 plus chemotherapy seems to improve progression-free survival relative to placebo plus chemotherapy. These data support the clinical value of the TrPAL biomarker in this clinical setting; because the primary endpoint was met, the trial is to continue into the phase 3 part.Funding: Transgene, Avancées Diagnostiques pour de Nouvelles Approches Thérapeutiques (ADNA), and OSEO

Therapeutic vaccination with TG4010 and first-line chemotherapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a controlled phase 2B trial.

International audienceBACKGROUND: Chemotherapy is the standard of care for advanced stages of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). TG4010 is a targeted immunotherapy based on a poxvirus (modified vaccinia virus Ankara) that codes for MUC1 tumour-associated antigen and interleukin 2. This study assessed TG4010 in combination with first-line chemotherapy in advanced NSCLC. METHODS: 148 patients with advanced (stage IIIB [wet] or IV) NSCLC expressing MUC1 by immunohistochemistry, and with performance status 0 or 1, were enrolled in parallel groups in this open-label, phase 2B study. 74 patients were allocated to the combination therapy group, and received TG4010 (10(8) plaque forming units) plus cisplatin (75 mg/m(2) on day 1) and gemcitabine (1250 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8) repeated every 3 weeks for up to six cycles. 74 patients allocated to the control group received the same chemotherapy alone. Patients were allocated using a dynamic minimisation procedure stratified by centre, performance status, and disease stage. The primary endpoint was 6-month progression-free survival (PFS), with a target rate of 40% or higher in the experimental group. Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. This study is completed and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00415818. FINDINGS: 6-month PFS was 43*2% (32 of 74; 95% CI 33*4-53*5) in the TG4010 plus chemotherapy group, and 35*1% (26 of 74; 25*9-45*3) in the chemotherapy alone group. Fever, abdominal pain, and injection-site pain of any grade according to National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria were more common in the TG4010 group than in the chemotherapy alone group: 17 of 73 patients (23*3%) versus six of 72 (8*3%), 12 (16*4%) versus two (2*8%), and four (5*5%) versus zero (0%), respectively. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (33 [45*2%] of patients in the TG4010 plus chemotherapy group vs 31 [43*1%] in the chemotherapy alone group) and fatigue (18 [24*7%] vs 13 [18*1%]); the only grade 3-4 events that differed significantly between groups were anorexia (three [4*1%] vs 10 [13*9%]) and pleural effusion (none vs four [5*6%]). 38 of 73 patients (52*1%) in the TG4010 plus chemotherapy group and 34 of 72 (47*2%) in the chemotherapy alone group had at least one serious adverse event. INTERPRETATION: This phase 2B study suggests that TG4010 enhances the effect of chemotherapy in advanced NSCLC. A confirmatory phase 2B-3 trial has been initiated. FUNDING: Transgene SA, Advanced Diagnostics for New Therapeutic Approaches (ADNA)/OSEO

Capivasertib in Hormone Receptor-Positive Advanced Breast Cancer.

Background: AKT pathway activation is implicated in endocrine-therapy resistance. Data on the efficacy and safety of the AKT inhibitor capivasertib, as an addition to fulvestrant therapy, in patients with hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer are limited. Methods: In a phase 3, randomized, double-blind trial, we enrolled eligible pre-, peri-, and postmenopausal women and men with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer who had had a relapse or disease progression during or after treatment with an aromatase inhibitor, with or without previous cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 (CDK4/6) inhibitor therapy. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive capivasertib plus fulvestrant or placebo plus fulvestrant. The dual primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival assessed both in the overall population and among patients with AKT pathway-altered (PIK3CA, AKT1, or PTEN) tumors. Safety was assessed. Results: Overall, 708 patients underwent randomization; 289 patients (40.8%) had AKT pathway alterations, and 489 (69.1%) had received a CDK4/6 inhibitor previously for advanced breast cancer. In the overall population, the median progression-free survival was 7.2 months in the capivasertib-fulvestrant group, as compared with 3.6 months in the placebo-fulvestrant group (hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.60; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.51 to 0.71; P&lt;0.001). In the AKT pathway-altered population, the median progression-free survival was 7.3 months in the capivasertib-fulvestrant group, as compared with 3.1 months in the placebo-fulvestrant group (hazard ratio, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.65; P&lt;0.001). The most frequent adverse events of grade 3 or higher in patients receiving capivasertib-fulvestrant were rash (in 12.1% of patients, vs. in 0.3% of those receiving placebo-fulvestrant) and diarrhea (in 9.3% vs. 0.3%). Adverse events leading to discontinuation were reported in 13.0% of the patients receiving capivasertib and in 2.3% of those receiving placebo. Conclusions: Capivasertib-fulvestrant therapy resulted in significantly longer progression-free survival than treatment with fulvestrant alone among patients with hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer whose disease had progressed during or after previous aromatase inhibitor therapy with or without a CDK4/6 inhibitor. (Funded by AstraZeneca and the National Cancer Institute; CAPItello-291 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04305496.)