Complete pathological response to neoadjuvant treatment is associated with better survival outcomes in patients with soft tissue sarcoma: Results of a retrospective multicenter study

[Background] Locally advanced soft tissue sarcoma (STS) management may include neoadjuvant or adjuvant treatment by radiotherapy (RT), chemotherapy (CT) or chemoradiotherapy (CRT) followed by wide surgical excision. While pathological complete response (pCR) to preoperative treatment is prognostic for survival in osteosarcomas, its significance for STS is unclear. We aimed to evaluate the prognostic significance of pCR to pre-operative treatment on 3-year disease-free survival (3y-DFS) in STS patients.[Methods] This is an observational, retrospective, international, study of adult patients with primary non-metastatic STS of the extremities and trunk wall, any grade, diagnosed between 2008 and 2012, treated with at least neoadjuvant treatment and surgical resection and observed for a minimum of 3 years after diagnosis. The primary objective was to evaluate the effect of pCR. (≤5% viable tumor cells or ≥95% necrosis/fibrosis) on 3y-DFS. Effect on local recurrence-free survival (LRFS), distant recurrence-free survival (MFS) overall survival (OS) at 3 years was also analyzed. Statistical univariate analysis utilized chi-square independence test and odds ratio confidence interval (CI) estimate, multivariate analysis was performed using LASSO.[Results] A total of 330 patients (median age 56 years old, range:19–95) treated by preoperative RT (67%), CT (15%) or CRT (18%) followed by surgery were included. pCR was achieved in 74/330 (22%) of patients, of which 56/74 (76%) had received RT. 3-yr DFS was observed in 76% of patients with pCR vs 61% without pCR (p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that pCR is statistically associated with better MFS (95% CI, 1.054–3.417; p = 0.033), LRFS (95% CI, 1.226–5.916; p = 0.014), DFS (95% CI, 1.165–4.040; p = 0.015) and OS at 3 years (95% CI, 1.072–5.210; p = 0.033).[Conclusions] In a wide, heterogeneous STS population we showed that pCR to preoperative treatment is prognostic for survival.Nanobiotix S.A., Paris, France.Peer reviewe

Alpelisib plus fulvestrant for PIK3CA-mutated, hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor-2–negative advanced breast cancer: final overall survival results from SOLAR-1

Background Activation of the phosphatidylinositol-3-kinase (PI3K) pathway via PIK3CA mutations occurs in 28%-46% of hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor-2-negative (HER2−) advanced breast cancers (ABCs) and is associated with poor prognosis. The SOLAR-1 trial showed that the addition of alpelisib to fulvestrant treatment provided statistically significant and clinically meaningful progression-free survival (PFS) benefit in PIK3CA-mutated, HR+, HER2− ABC. Patients and methods Men and postmenopausal women with HR+, HER2− ABC whose disease progressed on or after aromatase inhibitor (AI) were randomized 1 : 1 to receive alpelisib (300 mg/day) plus fulvestrant (500 mg every 28 days and once on day 15) or placebo plus fulvestrant. Overall survival (OS) in the PIK3CA-mutant cohort was evaluated by Kaplan–Meier methodology and a one-sided stratified log-rank test was carried out with an O'Brien–Fleming efficacy boundary of P ≤ 0.0161. Results In the PIK3CA-mutated cohort (n = 341), median OS [95% confidence interval (CI)] was 39.3 months (34.1-44.9) for alpelisib-fulvestrant and 31.4 months (26.8-41.3) for placebo-fulvestrant [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.86 (95% CI, 0.64-1.15; P = 0.15)]. OS results did not cross the prespecified efficacy boundary. Median OS (95% CI) in patients with lung and/or liver metastases was 37.2 months (28.7-43.6) and 22.8 months (19.0-26.8) in the alpelisib-fulvestrant and placebo-fulvestrant arms, respectively [HR = 0.68 (0.46-1.00)]. Median times to chemotherapy (95% CI) for the alpelisib-fulvestrant and placebo-fulvestrant arms were 23.3 months (15.2-28.4) and 14.8 months (10.5-22.6), respectively [HR = 0.72 (0.54-0.95)]. No new safety signals were observed with longer follow-up. Conclusions Although the analysis did not cross the prespecified boundary for statistical significance, there was a 7.9-month numeric improvement in median OS when alpelisib was added to fulvestrant treatment of patients with PIK3CA-mutated, HR+, HER2− ABC. Overall, these results further support the statistically significant prolongation of PFS observed with alpelisib plus fulvestrant in this population, which has a poor prognosis due to a PIK3CA mutation. ClinicalTrials.gov Id NCT02437318

Impact of the Specific Mutation in KRAS Codon 12 Mutated Tumors on Treatment Efficacy in Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Receiving Cetuximab-Based First-Line Therapy: A Pooled Analysis of Three Trials

Purpose: This study investigated the impact of specific mutations in codon 12 of the Kirsten-ras (KRAS) gene on treatment efficacy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Patients: Overall, 119 patients bearing a KRAS mutation in codon 12 were evaluated. All patients received cetuximab-based first-line chemotherapy within the Central European Cooperative Oncology Group (CECOG), AIO KRK-0104 or AIO KRK-0306 trials. Results: Patients with KRAS codon 12 mutant mCRC showed a broad range of outcome when treated with cetuximab-based first-line regimens. Patients with tumors bearing a KRAS p.G12D mutation showed a strong trend to a more favorable outcome compared to other mutations (overall survival 23.3 vs. 14-18 months; hazard ratio 0.66, range 0.43-1.03). An interaction model illustrated that KRAS p.G12C was associated with unfavorable outcome when treated with oxaliplatin plus cetuximab. Conclusion: The present analysis suggests that KRAS codon 12 mutation may not represent a homogeneous entity in mCRC when treated with cetuximab-based first-line therapy. Copyright (C) 2012 S. Karger AG, Base

FORT-1: Phase II/III Study of Rogaratinib Versus Chemotherapy in Patients With Locally Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma Selected Based on FGFR1/3 mRNA Expression

Purpose: Rogaratinib, an oral pan-fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR1-4) inhibitor, showed promising phase I efficacy and safety in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC) with FGFR1-3 mRNA overexpression. We assessed rogaratinib efficacy and safety versus chemotherapy in patients with FGFR mRNA-positive advanced/metastatic UC previously treated with platinum chemotherapy. Methods: FORT-1 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03410693) was a phase II/III, randomized, open-label trial. Patients with FGFR1/3 mRNA-positive locally advanced or metastatic UC with ≥ 1 prior platinum-containing regimen were randomly assigned (1:1) to rogaratinib (800 mg orally twice daily, 3-week cycles; n = 87) or chemotherapy (docetaxel 75 mg/m2, paclitaxel 175 mg/m2, or vinflunine 320 mg/m2 intravenously once every 3 weeks; n = 88). The primary end point was overall survival, with objective response rate (ORR) analysis planned following phase II accrual. Because of comparable efficacy between treatments, enrollment was stopped before progression to phase III; a full interim analysis of phase II was completed. Results: ORRs were 20.7% (rogaratinib, 18/87; 95% CI, 12.7 to 30.7) and 19.3% (chemotherapy, 17/88; 95% CI, 11.7 to 29.1). Median overall survival was 8.3 months (95% CI, 6.5 to not estimable) and 9.8 months (95% CI, 6.8 to not estimable; hazard ratio, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.71 to 1.72; P = .67). Grade 3/4 events occurred in 37 (43.0%)/4 (4.7%) patients and 32 (39.0%)/15 (18.3%), respectively. No rogaratinib-related deaths occurred. Exploratory analysis of patients with FGFR3 DNA alterations showed ORRs of 52.4% (11/21; 95% CI, 29.8 to 74.3) for rogaratinib and 26.7% (4/15; 95% CI, 7.8 to 55.1) for chemotherapy. Conclusion: To our knowledge, these are the first data to compare FGFR-directed therapy with chemotherapy in patients with FGFR-altered UC, showing comparable efficacy and manageable safety. Exploratory testing suggested FGFR3 DNA alterations in association with FGFR1/3 mRNA overexpression may be better predictors of rogaratinib response

Durvalumab Plus Carboplatin/Paclitaxel Followed by Maintenance Durvalumab With or Without Olaparib as First-Line Treatment for Advanced Endometrial Cancer: The Phase III DUO-E Trial

PURPOSE Immunotherapy and chemotherapy combinations have shown activity in endometrial cancer, with greater benefit in mismatch repair (MMR)-deficient (dMMR) than MMR-proficient (pMMR) disease. Adding a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor may improve outcomes, especially in pMMR disease. METHODS This phase III, global, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial randomly assigned eligible patients with newly diagnosed advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer 1:1:1 to: carboplatin/paclitaxel plus durvalumab placebo followed by placebo maintenance (control arm); carboplatin/paclitaxel plus durvalumab followed by maintenance durvalumab plus olaparib placebo (durvalumab arm); or carboplatin/paclitaxel plus durvalumab followed by maintenance durvalumab plus olaparib (durvalumab + olaparib arm). The primary end points were progression-free survival (PFS) in the durvalumab arm versus control and the durvalumab + olaparib arm versus control. RESULTS Seven hundred eighteen patients were randomly assigned. In the intention-to-treat population, statistically significant PFS benefit was observed in the durvalumab (hazard ratio [HR], 0.71 [95% CI, 0.57 to 0.89]; P = .003) and durvalumab + olaparib arms (HR, 0.55 [95% CI, 0.43 to 0.69]; P < .0001) versus control. Prespecified, exploratory subgroup analyses showed PFS benefit in dMMR (HR [durvalumab v control], 0.42 [95% CI, 0.22 to 0.80]; HR [durvalumab + olaparib v control], 0.41 [95% CI, 0.21 to 0.75]) and pMMR subgroups (HR [durvalumab v control], 0.77 [95% CI, 0.60 to 0.97]; HR [durvalumab + olaparib v control] 0.57; [95% CI, 0.44 to 0.73]); and in PD-L1-positive subgroups (HR [durvalumab v control], 0.63 [95% CI, 0.48 to 0.83]; HR [durvalumab + olaparib v control], 0.42 [95% CI, 0.31 to 0.57]). Interim overall survival results (maturity approximately 28%) were supportive of the primary outcomes (durvalumab v control: HR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.56 to 1.07]; P = .120; durvalumab + olaparib v control: HR, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.42 to 0.83]; P = .003). The safety profiles of the experimental arms were generally consistent with individual agents. CONCLUSION Carboplatin/paclitaxel plus durvalumab followed by maintenance durvalumab with or without olaparib demonstrated a statistically significant and clinically meaningful PFS benefit in patients with advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer

Results of a phase II study comparing three dosing regimens of fulvestrant in postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer (FINDER2)

The Faslodex Investigation of Dose evaluation in Estrogen Receptor-positive advanced breast cancer (FINDER)2 study evaluated the efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics (PK) of three fulvestrant dosing regimens. FINDER2 enrolled Western postmenopausal women recurring or progressing after prior endocrine therapy. Primary endpoint: objective response rate (ORR); secondary endpoints: time to progression (TTP), clinical benefit rate (CBR), tolerability, and PK parameters. Patients were randomized to receive fulvestrant: 250 mg/month (approved dose [AD]); 250 mg plus loading dose (loading dose [LD]; 500 mg on day 0, 250 mg on days 14, 28, and monthly thereafter); or 500 mg (high dose [HD]; 500 mg/month plus 500 mg on day 14 of Month 1). Treatment continued until disease progression or discontinuation. 144 patients were randomized: fulvestrant AD (n = 47); LD (n = 51); HD (n = 46). ORRs were: 8.5% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.4, 20.4%), 5.9% (1.2, 16.2%), and 15.2% (6.3, 28.9%) in the AD, LD, and HD arms, respectively. CBRs were: 31.9% (95% CI: 19.1, 47.1%), 47.1% (32.9, 61.5%), and 47.8% (32.9, 63.1%) for the AD, LD, and HD arms, respectively. Median TTP (months) was numerically longer for HD (6.0) and LD (6.1) versus AD (3.1). Tolerability was similar across dosing regimens. Steady-state plasma fulvestrant concentrations were predictable and achieved earlier with LD and HD. While there appeared to be a trend toward improved efficacy with HD and LD versus AD, no significant differences could be shown. A parallel study (FINDER1) has reported similar findings in Japanese patients. © 2010 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC.SCOPUS: ar.jinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishe