Randomized Phase II Trial of Sapanisertib ± TAK-117 vs. Everolimus in Patients With Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma After VEGF-Targeted Therapy

MTOR inhibitors; Everolimus; Renal cell carcinomaInhibidores de MTOR; Everolimus; Carcinoma de células renalesInhibidors de MTOR; Everolimus; Carcinoma de cèl·lules renalsBackground Sapanisertib, a dual mTORC1/2 inhibitor, may offer more complete inhibition of the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway than mTORC1 inhibitors, such as everolimus. This phase II study evaluated the efficacy and safety of single-agent sapanisertib and sapanisertib plus the PI3Kα inhibitor TAK-117, vs. everolimus in patients with advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) that had progressed on or after VEGF-targeted therapy. Materials and Methods Patients with histologically confirmed, advanced ccRCC were randomized 1:1:1 to receive single-agent everolimus 10 mg once daily, single-agent sapanisertib 30 mg once weekly, or sapanisertib 4 mg plus TAK-117 200 mg, both once daily for 3 days/week, in 28-day cycles. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Results Ninety-five patients were treated with everolimus or sapanisertib (n = 32 each), or sapanisertib plus TAK-117 (n = 31). There were no significant differences in PFS among the 3 groups or across any subgroups. Median PFS was 3.8 months with everolimus vs. 3.6 months with sapanisertib (HR, 1.33; 95% CI, 0.75-2.36), and 3.1 months with sapanisertib plus TAK-117 (HR, 1.37; 95% CI, 0.75-2.52). No significant differences in overall survival were seen among groups. Overall response rate was 16.7%, 0%, and 7.1%, respectively. Discontinuations due to treatment-emergent adverse events were 15.6%, 28.1%, and 29.0%. Conclusion Sapanisertib with or without TAK-117 was less tolerable and did not improve efficacy vs. everolimus in patients with advanced ccRCC who had relapsed after or were refractory to VEGF-targeted therapies. Dual mTORC1/2 inhibition may not be an effective therapeutic approach for these patients.This article is supported by Takeda Development Center Americas, Inc., Lexington, MA, USA

Multicenter randomized phase II study of two schedules of docetaxel, estramustine, and prednisone versus mitoxantrone plus prednisone in patients with metastatic hormone-refractory prostate cancer

A B S T R A C T Purpose Mitoxantrone-corticosteroid is currently the standard palliative treatment in hormone-refractory prostate cancer (HRPC) patients. Recent clinical trials documented the high activity of the docetaxel-estramustine combination. We conducted a randomized phase II study to evaluate prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response (primary end point) and safety of two docetaxelestramustine-prednisone (DEP) regimens and mitoxantrone-prednisone (MP). Patients and Methods One hundred thirty metastatic HRPC patients were randomly assigned to receive docetaxel (70 mg/m 2 on day 2 or 35 mg/m 2 on days 2 and 9 of each 21-day cycle) and estramustine (280 mg PO tid on days 1 through 5 and 8 through 12) or mitoxantrone 12 mg/m 2 every 3 weeks; all patients received prednisone (10 mg daily). Results One hundred twenty-seven patients were assessable for PSA response and safety. A Ն 50% PSA decline was found in a greater percentage of patients in the docetaxel arms (67% and 63%) compared with MP (18%; P ϭ .0001). Median time to PSA progression was five times longer with DEP than with MP (8.8 and 9.3 v 1.7 months, respectively; P ϭ .000001). Overall survival was better in the docetaxel arms (18.6 and 18.4 months) compared with the MP arm (13.4 months), but not significantly so (P ϭ .3). Crossover rates differed significantly among treatment arms (16%, 10%, and 48% in arms A, B, and C, respectively; P ϭ .00001). Treatment-related toxicities were mild and mainly hematologic. Conclusion The results of this randomized phase II study showed significantly higher PSA decline Յ 50% and longer times to progression in HRPC patients receiving DEP-based chemotherapy than MP, and that DEP could be proposed in this setting

Exome sequencing identifies germline variants in DIS3 in familial multiple myeloma

[Excerpt] Multiple myeloma (MM) is the third most common hematological malignancy, after Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma and Leukemia. MM is generally preceded by Monoclonal Gammopathy of Undetermined Significance (MGUS) [1], and epidemiological studies have identified older age, male gender, family history, and MGUS as risk factors for developing MM [2]. The somatic mutational landscape of sporadic MM has been increasingly investigated, aiming to identify recurrent genetic events involved in myelomagenesis. Whole exome and whole genome sequencing studies have shown that MM is a genetically heterogeneous disease that evolves through accumulation of both clonal and subclonal driver mutations [3] and identified recurrently somatically mutated genes, including KRAS, NRAS, FAM46C, TP53, DIS3, BRAF, TRAF3, CYLD, RB1 and PRDM1 [3,4,5]. Despite the fact that family-based studies have provided data consistent with an inherited genetic susceptibility to MM compatible with Mendelian transmission [6], the molecular basis of inherited MM predisposition is only partly understood. Genome-Wide Association (GWAS) studies have identified and validated 23 loci significantly associated with an increased risk of developing MM that explain ~16% of heritability [7] and only a subset of familial cases are thought to have a polygenic background [8]. Recent studies have identified rare germline variants predisposing to MM in KDM1A [9], ARID1A and USP45 [10], and the implementation of next-generation sequencing technology will allow the characterization of more such rare variants. [...]French National Cancer Institute (INCA) and the Fondation Française pour la Recherche contre le Myélome et les Gammapathies (FFMRG), the Intergroupe Francophone du Myélome (IFM), NCI R01 NCI CA167824 and a generous donation from Matthew Bell. This work was supported in part through the computational resources and staff expertise provided by Scientific Computing at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai. Research reported in this paper was supported by the Office of Research Infrastructure of the National Institutes of Health under award number S10OD018522. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. The authors thank the Association des Malades du Myélome Multiple (AF3M) for their continued support and participation. Where authors are identified as personnel of the International Agency for Research on Cancer / World Health Organization, the authors alone are responsible for the views expressed in this article and they do not necessarily represent the decisions, policy or views of the International Agency for Research on Cancer / World Health Organizatio

Detecting lung cancer relapse using self-evaluation forms weekly filled at home: the sentinel follow-up

WOS:000327895000011International audienceWe aimed to assess if patients' ratings of symptoms can be used to provide an early indication of disease recurrence or progression in lung cancer. We proposed a simple self-evaluation form made of six clinical parameters weekly scored by patients at home as a follow-up-here named sentinel-to improve relapse detection. Its performances were compared to those of a routine imaging follow-up. Patients with lung cancer were prospectively recruited to weekly fill a form at home for self-assessing weight, fatigue, pain, appetite, cough, and breathlessness during at least 4 months. Each patient reported weight and assessed the severity of each symptom by grading it from 0 (no symptom) to 3 (major symptom). A score was retrospectively designed for discriminating patients with relapse from those without. Accuracy of relapse detection was then compared to values of the routine planned imaging. Forty-three patients were included in our center and recruited for 16 weeks or more follow-up during which at least one tumor imaging assessment was performed (CT scan or PET-CT). Forty-one completed the form weekly. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of sentinel were high (86, 93, 86 % and 93 vs 79, 96, 92, and 90 % for routine imaging-p = ns) and well correlated with relapse (p chi 2 \textgreater 0.001). Moreover, relapses were detectable with sentinel on average 6 weeks earlier than the planned imaging. This study suggests that a personalized cancer follow-up based on a weekly self-evaluation of six symptoms is feasible and may be accurate for earlier detection of lung cancer relapse, allowing integration in electronic devices for real-time patient outcome follow-up

Detection of lung cancer relapse using self-reported symptoms transmitted via an Internet Web-application: pilot study of the sentinel follow-up

WOS:000335775000005International audienceWe aimed to investigate whether patient self-evaluated symptoms transmitted via Internet can be used between planned visits to provide an early indication of disease relapse in lung cancer. Between 2/2013 and 8/2013, 42 patients with lung cancer having access to Internet were prospectively recruited to weekly fill a form of 11 self-assessed symptoms called "sentinel follow-up". Data were sent to the oncologist in real-time between planned visits. An alert email was sent to oncologist when self-scored symptoms matched some predefined criteria. Follow-up visit and imaging were then organized after a phone call for confirming suspect symptoms. Weekly and monthly compliances, easiness with which patients used the web-application and the accuracy of the sentinel follow-up for relapse detection were assessed and compared to a routine visit and imaging follow-up. Median follow-up duration was 18 weeks (8-32). Weekly and monthly average compliances were 79 and 94 %, respectively. Sixty percents of patients declared to be less anxious during the few days before planned visit and imaging with the sentinel follow-up than without. Sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predictive values provided by the sentinel (planned imaging) follow-up were 100 %(84 %), 89 %(96 %), 81 %(91 %), and 100 %(93 %), respectively and well correlated with relapse (p chi (2) \textless 0.001). On average, relapses were detectable 5 weeks earlier with sentinel than planned visit. An individualized cancer follow-up that schedule visit and imaging according to the patient status based on weekly self-reported symptoms transmitted via Internet is feasible with high compliance. It may even provide earlier detection of lung cancer relapse and care

Totally implantable venous access ports: a prospective long-term study of early and late complications in adult patients with cancer

International audiencePURPOSE: Totally implantable venous access ports (TIVAP) have been widely used for many years in the management of patients suffering from cancer. The implantation and long-term use of TIVAPs are associated with mechanical, thrombotic, and infectious complications. This is the first exhaustive prospective study of all complications occurring in a whole population on long-term follow-up and therefore allows an objective assessment to be made of the safety of TIVAPs.METHODS: We carried out a prospective single-center observational study. All adult patients with cancer who had a TIVAP implanted between January 1 and December 31, 2006 were registered. Early and late complications were recorded until the removal of the device, the patient's death, or until December 31, 2013. Exhaustive data concerning patients and TIVAP was recorded at time of implantation.RESULTS: Four hundred and ninety-three TIVAPs were implanted in 483 adult cancer patients and were followed during a period from 1 to 94 months (median = 18 months) representing a global quantity of 367,359 catheter-days. Eighty-seven complications were recorded (0.237/1000 catheter-days), including 37 infections (0.101/1000 catheter-days), 17 thrombotic events (0.046/1000 catheter-days), and 9 extravasations. Out of the 87 events, 62 (71.3%) occurred during the first year after implantation. Events were therefore extremely rare after 1 year. Thromboembolic and infectious complications were rare and no risk factors for these were found.CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates excellent tolerability, with only occasional complications. Most of these occurred during the year following implantation. A TIVAP may also be left in place for an extremely long time

Randomized Phase II Trial of Sapanisertib ± TAK-117 vs. Everolimus in Patients With Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma After VEGF-Targeted Therapy

Background Sapanisertib, a dual mTORC1/2 inhibitor, may offer more complete inhibition of the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway than mTORC1 inhibitors, such as everolimus. This phase II study evaluated the efficacy and safety of single-agent sapanisertib and sapanisertib plus the PI3K alpha inhibitor TAK-117, vs. everolimus in patients with advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) that had progressed on or after VEGF-targeted therapy. Materials and Methods Patients with histologically confirmed, advanced ccRCC were randomized 1:1:1 to receive single-agent everolimus 10 mg once daily, single-agent sapanisertib 30 mg once weekly, or sapanisertib 4 mg plus TAK-117 200 mg, both once daily for 3 days/week, in 28-day cycles. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Results Ninety-five patients were treated with everolimus or sapanisertib (n = 32 each), or sapanisertib plus TAK-117 (n = 31). There were no significant differences in PFS among the 3 groups or across any subgroups. Median PFS was 3.8 months with everolimus vs. 3.6 months with sapanisertib (HR, 1.33; 95% CI, 0.75-2.36), and 3.1 months with sapanisertib plus TAK-117 (HR, 1.37; 95% CI, 0.75-2.52). No significant differences in overall survival were seen among groups. Overall response rate was 16.7%, 0%, and 7.1%, respectively. Discontinuations due to treatment-emergent adverse events were 15.6%, 28.1%, and 29.0%. Conclusion Sapanisertib with or without TAK-117 was less tolerable and did not improve efficacy vs. everolimus in patients with advanced ccRCC who had relapsed after or were refractory to VEGF-targeted therapies. Dual mTORC1/2 inhibition may not be an effective therapeutic approach for these patients.This article evaluates the efficacy and safety of single-agent sapanisertib, and of sapanisertib plus the PI3K alpha inhibitor TAK-117, versus everolimus in patients with advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma that had progressed on or after VEGF-targeted therapy

A systematic literature review and network meta-analysis of treatments for patients with untreated multiple myeloma not eligible for stem cell transplantation.

In newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM), patients ineligible for front-line autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT), melphalan and prednisone (MP) with thalidomide (MPT) or bortezomib (VMP) are standard first-line therapeutic options. Despite new treatment regimens incorporating bortezomib or lenalidomide, MM remains incurable. The FIRST study demonstrated significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for the combination of lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone (Rd) until progression vs. MPT in transplant-ineligible ndMM patients. However, to date no head-to-head randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have compared Rd or MPT versus VMP. We conducted a network meta-analysis using RCTs identified through a systematic literature review to evaluate the relative efficacy of Rd versus other regimens on survival endpoints in previously untreated MM patients ineligible for ASCT. In this analysis, Rd was associated with a significant PFS and survival advantage versus other first-line treatments (VMP, MPT, MP), challenging the role of alkylators in this setting