Phase II Study of Celecoxib and Docetaxel in Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Patients with Progression after Platinum-Based Therapy

IntroductionTo evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of the combination of celecoxib and docetaxel in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer after failure of platinum-based therapy.MethodsPatients with relapsed non-small cell lung cancer received celecoxib 400 mg orally twice daily beginning 7 days before the first cycle of docetaxel and the celecoxib was continued with no interruption. Docetaxel 75 mg/m2 was administered intravenously on a 21-day cycle. The primary end point of the study was the 6-month survival rate.ResultsTwenty-four patients were enrolled and twenty patients were treated (median age 60, M:F 16:8). Most patients had a baseline performance status of 1. The objective response rate was 10% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0–25%) and the 6-month survival rate was 59% (95% CI 37–80%). Median survival time was 6.9 months (95% CI, 2.8–15.2 months) and the 1- and 2-year survival rates were 36% (95% CI, 15–57%) and 1% (95% CI, 0–10%), respectively. The most frequent grade ≥3 adverse events were neutropenia (58%) and neutropenic fever (21%) which resulted in early closure of the trial.ConclusionsThe addition of celecoxib to docetaxel did not seem to improve the response rate and survival compared with docetaxel alone. The combination demonstrated considerable neutropenia and complications from febrile neutropenia that suggests celecoxib may enhance the marrow toxicity of docetaxel

Phase II Study of Cediranib in Patients with Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma: SWOG S0509

IntroductionMalignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) tumors express vascular epithelial growth factor (VEGF) and VEGF receptors. We conducted a phase II study of the oral pan-VEGF receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor, cediranib, in patients with MPM after platinum-based systemic chemotherapy.MethodsPatients with MPM previously treated with a platinum-containing chemotherapy regimen and a performance status 0 to 2 were eligible for enrollment. Cediranib 45 mg/d was administered until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end point was response rate. Tumor measurements were made by RECIST criteria, with a subset analysis conducted using modified RECIST. A two-stage design with an early stopping rule based on response rate was used.ResultsFifty-four patients were enrolled. Of 47 evaluable patients, 4 patients (9%) had objective responses, 16 patients (34%) had stable disease, 20 patients (43%) had disease progression, 2 patients (4%) had symptomatic deterioration, and 1 patient (2%) had early death. The most common toxicities were fatigue (64%), diarrhea (64%), and hypertension (70%); 91% of patients required a dose reduction. Median overall survival was 9.5 months, 1-year survival was 36%, and median progression-free survival was 2.6 months.ConclusionCediranib monotherapy has modest single-agent activity in MPM after platinum-based therapy. However, some patient tumors were highly sensitive to cediranib. This study provides a rationale for further testing of cediranib plus chemotherapy in MPM and highlights the need to identify a predictive biomarker for cediranib

Brief Report: Safety and Antitumor Activity of Alectinib Plus Atezolizumab From a Phase 1b Study in Advanced ALK-Positive NSCLC

INTRODUCTION: Alectinib is a preferred first-line treatment option for advanced ALK-positive NSCLC. Combination regimens of alectinib with immune checkpoint inhibitors are being evaluated for synergistic effects. METHODS: Adults with treatment-naive, stage IIIB/IV, or recurrent ALK-positive NSCLC were enrolled into a two-stage phase 1b study. Patients received alectinib 600 mg (twice daily during cycle 1 and throughout each 21-d cycle thereafter) plus atezolizumab 1200 mg (d8 of cycle 1 and then d1 of each 21-d cycle). Primary objectives were to evaluate safety and tolerability of alectinib plus atezolizumab. Secondary objectives included assessments of antitumor activity. RESULTS: In total, 21 patients received more than or equal to 1 dose of alectinib or atezolizumab. As no dose-limiting toxicities were observed in stage 1 (n = 7), the starting dose and schedule were continued into stage 2 (n = 14). Median duration of follow-up was 29 months (range: 1-39). Grade 3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 57% of the patients, most often rash (19%). No grade 4 or 5 treatment-related adverse events were reported. Confirmed objective response rate was 86% (18 of 21; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 64-97). Median progression-free survival was not estimable (NE) (95% CI: 13 mo-NE), neither was median overall survival (95% CI: 33 mo-NE). CONCLUSIONS: The combination of alectinib and atezolizumab is feasible, but increased toxicity was found compared with the individual agents. With small sample sizes and relatively short follow-up, definitive conclusions regarding antitumor activity cannot be made

Adjuvant therapy for resected non-small cell lung cancer

Surgery remains the initial treatment for patients with early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The frequent occurrence of distant metastases and local regional failure after surgical resection would indicate that additional treatment is necessary. Early trials of adjuvant chemotherapy and postoperative radiation were often plagued by small patient sample size, inadequate surgical staging, and ineffective or antiquated treatment. A 1995 meta-analysis found a nonsignificant reduction in risk of death for postoperative cisplatin-based chemotherapy. This was followed by a new generation of randomized phase III trials some of which have reported a benefit for chemotherapy in the adjuvant setting. Based on the results of these trials, platin-based chemotherapy has become the standard of care for resected stages II and IIIA NSCLC. The role of postoperative radiation therapy remains to be defined. In the future, improvement in survival outcomes from adjuvant treatment is likely to result from the evaluation of novel agents, identification of tumor markers predictive of disease relapse, and definition of factors that determine sensitivity to therapeutic agents. Some of the molecularly targeted agents such as the angiogenesis and epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors are being incorporated into clinical trials. Gene expression profiles and proteomics are techniques being used to create prediction models to identify patients at risk for disease relapse. Molecular markers such as ERCC1 may determine response to treatment. Increasing the understanding of the molecular makeup of lung cancer will hopefully increase cure rates for patients by maximizing the efficacy of the adjuvant therapy

A phase II study of mitomycin C, etoposide, and cisplatin in advanced non-small cell lung cancer

Standard chemotherapeutic regimens, such as cisplatin and etoposide, may improve quality of life and prolong survival in patients with incurable non- small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This trial was designed to evaluate the activity and toxicity of a regimen combining three of the most active agents against advanced-stage NSCLC: mitomycin C, etoposide, and cisplatin (MEP). Sixty-eight patients with stage IIIB (pleural effusion) or IV NSCLC received cisplatin 80 mg/m2 i.v. on day 1 and etoposide 80 mg/m2 i.v. on days 1, 2, and 3 every 3 weeks along with mitomycin C 10 mg/m2 i.v. on day 1 of the first and third cycles for a median of four cycles (range, 1-11). Median age was 59 years, and nine patients were enrolled after relapse from previously treated early-stage NSCLC. Eighty-eight percent of patients had stage IV disease, and 14 (21%) had brain metastases at diagnosis. Palliative radiotherapy was given to 10 patients (15%) before MEP and to 17 (25%) concurrent with MEP. The major toxicity of MEP was myelosuppression, with grade 3-4 neutropenia in 74% of patients. Sixteen patients (24%) had documented infections, and there were eight (12%) treatment-related deaths. Partial response was observed in 24 patients (35%) with a median duration of 4.4 months, (range 1.4-13 months). Median survival was 8.1 months (range, 1- 34 months), and 1-year survival was 32%. The addition of mitomycin C to cisplatin and etoposide resulted in response and survival rates comparable with those achieved with standard regimens in patients with advanced NSCLC but was associated with substantial hematologic toxicity and unacceptable treatment-related mortality

Effectiveness and safety of post-induction phase bevacizumab treatment for patients with non-small-cell lung cancer: results from the ARIES observational cohort study

Data from randomized, controlled trials suggest that post-induction phase (IP) treatment with bevacizumab may benefit patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Real-world clinical practice, however, can involve variable use and patterns of treatment in broader patient populations. To assess the effect of bevacizumab on post-IP overall survival (OS) following IP chemotherapy + bevacizumab, analyses were conducted in patients enrolled in the Avastin(®) Registry--Investigation of Effectiveness and Safety (ARIES) observational cohort study (OCS) who received post-IP bevacizumab. ARIES was a large, prospective OCS of patients who received chemotherapy in combination with bevacizumab for the first-line treatment of NSCLC. This unplanned, post hoc analysis included patients who received chemotherapy and bevacizumab and who did not have progressive disease through the completion of IP treatment. A dichotomous analysis compared outcomes in patients who did and did not receive bevacizumab before a landmark date of day 30 post IP. A cumulative exposure analysis used a time-dependent Cox regression model to assess the effect of cumulative post-IP bevacizumab exposure on post-IP OS. In the dichotomous analysis, the duration of post-IP OS was significantly longer in patients who received post-IP bevacizumab; median post-IP OS was 15.6 vs. 11.3 months, respectively (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.80; 95 % confidence interval 0.71-0.91; P < 0.001). The cumulative exposure analysis observed that each additional cycle of cumulative bevacizumab exposure decreased the HR for post-IP OS by 2.7 %, on average. In conclusion, post-IP bevacizumab exposure was associated with improved post-IP OS in patients with advanced NSCLC who were enrolled in the ARIES OCS

Phase II Trial of Sunitinib Maintenance Therapy After Platinum-Based Chemotherapy in Patients with Extensive-Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer

Introduction:The prognosis for patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer remains poor. This trial was designed to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of maintenance sunitinib after platinum-etoposide chemotherapy.Methods:Patients who demonstrated objective tumor response or stable disease after four cycles of platinum plus etoposide chemotherapy were eligible. Sunitinib was given at 50 mg daily for 4 weeks of a 6-week cycle until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end point was 4-month progression-free survival (PFS) rate from initiation of sunitinib.Results:Sixteen patients were enrolled. Responses to platinum-etoposide were complete response (CR)/partial response (PR)/stable disease (SD) = 3/11/2. The median number of weeks on sunitinib was 4 (range: 1.4–20). Reasons for sunitinib discontinuation were disease progression (50%), toxicity (31%), and patient request (19%). Median PFS from the start of sunitinib was 2.5 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.8–3.1). Further accrual would have failed to reach the target PFS rate, so the study was terminated. There were no objective responses to sunitinib, but four patients (25%) had disease stability for 15, 15, 17, and 20 weeks. Median PFS and overall survival from the start of chemotherapy were 6.2 months (95% CI, 4.1–6.5) and 8.2 months (95% CI, 6.2–14.7), respectively. Grade 3 to grade 4 toxicity included thrombocytopenia (25%), fatigue (19%), muscle weakness (13%), and hypothyroidism (6%).Conclusions:Sunitinib did not seem to maintain disease stability after response to chemotherapy. Sunitinib was discontinued in half of patients due to toxicity or request to stop therapy. Although disease stability with sunitinib was noted in four patients, this approach does not seem to warrant further clinical study