Dataset Information

Maintenance Sunitinib following Initial Platinum-Based Combination Chemotherapy in Advanced-Stage IIIB/IV Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Phase III Study-CALGB 30607 (Alliance).

ABSTRACT: The aim of this study was to evaluate efficacy of maintenance sunitinib after first-line chemotherapy for stage IIIB/IV NSCLC.Cancer and Leukemia Group B 30607 trial was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III study that enrolled patients without progression after four cycles of first-line platinum-based doublet chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab. Bevacizumab was allowed only during the four cycles of chemotherapy. Patients were randomized to receive sunitinib, 37.5 mg/d, or placebo and were treated until unacceptable adverse event(s), progression, or death. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS).A total of 210 patients were enrolled, randomized, and included in the intent-to-treat analysis. Ten patients did not receive maintenance therapy (four who received placebo and six who received sunitinib). Grade 3/4 adverse events affecting more than 5% of the patients were fatigue (25%), thrombocytopenia (12%), hypertension (12%), rash (11%), mucositis (11%), neutropenia (7%), and anemia (6%) for sunitinib and none for placebo. There were three grade 5 events in patients receiving sunitinib (one pulmonary hemorrhage, one other pulmonary event, and one death not associated with a Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events term) and two grade 5 events in patients receiving placebo (one other pulmonary event and one thromboembolism). Median PFS was 4.3 months for sunitinib and 2.6 months for placebo (hazard ratio = 0.62, 95% confidence interval: 0.47-0.82, p = 0.0006). Median overall survival was 11.7 months for sunitinib versus 12.1 months for placebo (hazard ratio = 0.98, 95% confidence interval: 0.73-1.31, p = 0.89).Maintenance sunitinib was safe and improved PFS as maintenance therapy in stage IIIB/IV NSCLC but had no impact on overall survival. There is no room for future investigations of sunitinib in this setting.

SUBMITTER: Baggstrom MQ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5500219 | biostudies-literature | 2017 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Maintenance Sunitinib following Initial Platinum-Based Combination Chemotherapy in Advanced-Stage IIIB/IV Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Phase III Study-CALGB 30607 (Alliance).

Baggstrom Maria Q MQ Socinski Mark A MA Wang Xiaofei F XF Gu Lin L Stinchcombe Thomas E TE Edelman Martin J MJ Baker Sherman S Feliciano Josephine J Novotny Paul P Hahn Olwen O Crawford Jeffrey A JA Vokes Everett E EE

Journal of thoracic oncology : official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer 20170201 5

<h4>Introduction</h4>The aim of this study was to evaluate efficacy of maintenance sunitinib after first-line chemotherapy for stage IIIB/IV NSCLC.<h4>Methods</h4>Cancer and Leukemia Group B 30607 trial was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III study that enrolled patients without progression after four cycles of first-line platinum-based doublet chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab. Bevacizumab was allowed only during the four cycles of chemotherapy. Patients were random ...[more]

PMID: 28161554

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeTo evaluate the efficacy of maintenance sunitinib after chemotherapy for small-cell lung cancer (SCLC).Patients and methodsThe Cancer and Leukemia Group B 30504 trial was a randomized, placebo-controlled, phase II study that enrolled patients before chemotherapy (cisplatin 80 mg/m(2) or carboplatin area under the curve of 5 on day 1 plus etoposide 100 mg/m(2) per day on days 1 to 3 every 21 days for four to six cycles). Patients without progression were randomly assigned 1:1 to placebo or sunitinib 37.5 mg per day until progression. Cross-over after progression was allowed. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) from random assignment for maintenance placebo versus sunitinib using a one-sided log-rank test with α = .15; 80 randomly assigned patients provided 89% power to detect a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.67.ResultsOne hundred forty-four patients were enrolled; 138 patients received chemotherapy. Ninety-five patients were randomly assigned; 10 patients did not receive maintenance therapy (five on each arm). Eighty-five patients received maintenance therapy (placebo, n = 41; sunitinib, n = 44). Grade 3 adverse events with more than 5% incidence were fatigue (19%), decreased neutrophils (14%), decreased leukocytes (7%), and decreased platelets (7%) for sunitinib and fatigue (10%) for placebo; grade 4 adverse events were GI hemorrhage (n = 1) and pancreatitis, hypocalcemia, and elevated lipase (n = 1; all in same patient) for sunitinib and thrombocytopenia (n = 1) and hypernatremia (n = 1) for placebo. Median PFS on maintenance was 2.1 months for placebo and 3.7 months for sunitinib (HR, 1.62; 70% CI, 1.27 to 2.08; 95% CI, 1.02 to 2.60; one-sided P = .02). Median overall survival from random assignment was 6.9 months for placebo and 9.0 months for sunitinib (HR, 1.28; 95% CI, 0.79 to 2.10; one-sided P = .16). Three sunitinib and no placebo patients achieved complete response during maintenance. Ten (77%) of 13 patients evaluable after cross-over had stable disease on sunitinib (6 to 27 weeks).ConclusionMaintenance sunitinib was safe and improved PFS in extensive-stage SCLC.

Project description:BACKGROUND:In the CALGB (Alliance) 100104 study, lenalidomide versus placebo after autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT) was investigated for patients with newly diagnosed myeloma. That study showed improved time to progression and overall survival and an increase in second primary malignancies for lenalidomide at a median follow-up of 34 months. Here we report an updated intention-to-treat analysis of CALGB (Alliance) 100104 at a median follow-up of 91 months. METHODS:Patients were eligible for this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial if they had symptomatic disease requiring treatment; had received, at most, two induction regimens; and had achieved stable disease or better in the first 100 days after ASCT. We randomly assigned patients to either lenalidomide or placebo groups using permuted block randomisation, with a fixed block size of six. Randomisation was stratified by three factors: normal or elevated ?2 microglobulin concentration at registration (?2·5 mg/L vs >2·5 mg/L), previous use or non-use of thalidomide during induction therapy, and previous use or non-use of lenalidomide during induction therapy. The starting dose was two capsules (10 mg) per day, escalated to three capsules (15 mg) per day after 3 months. The primary endpoint was time to progression (time of progressive disease or death from any cause), with intention-to-treat analysis. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT00114101. New patients are no longer being recruited, but some patients remain on treatment and in follow-up. FINDINGS:Between April 14, 2005, and July 2, 2009, 460 patients were randomly assigned to receive either lenalidomide (n=231) or placebo (n=229). After three interim analyses, the study was unblinded at a median follow-up of 18 months, at which point 86 (67%) of 128 patients without progressive disease in the placebo group chose to cross over to the lenalidomide group. The median follow-up for the updated survival analysis, as of Oct 19, 2016, was 91 months (IQR 83·6-103·1). The median time to progression was 57·3 months (95% CI 44·2-73·3) for the lenalidomide group and 28·9 months (23·0-36·3) for the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·57, 95% CI 0·46-0·71; p<0·0001). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (116 [50%] patients in the lenalidomide group and 41 [18%] patients in the placebo group) and thrombocytopenia (34 [15%] patients in the lenalidomide group and 12 [5%] patients in the placebo group). 18 (8%) haematological and 14 (6%) solid tumour second primary malignancies were diagnosed after randomisation and before disease progression in the lenalidomide group, compared with three (1%) haematological and nine (4%) solid tumour second primary malignancies in the placebo group. Three haematological and five solid tumour second primary malignancies in the placebo group were in the crossover subgroup. INTERPRETATION:Despite an increase in haematological adverse events and second primary malignancies, lenalidomide maintenance therapy after ASCT significantly improved time to progression and could be considered a standard of care. FUNDING:The National Cancer Institute.

Project description:Purpose Tumor overexpression of cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) has been associated with worse outcome in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) 30203, we found that the selective COX-2 inhibitor celecoxib in addition to chemotherapy in advanced NSCLC improved progression-free and overall survival in patients with moderate to high COX-2 expression by immunohistochemistry (IHC). CALGB 30801 (Alliance) was designed to prospectively confirm that finding. Patients and Methods Patients with NSCLC (stage IIIB with pleural effusion or stage IV according to American Joint Committee on Cancer [sixth edition] criteria) were preregistered, and biopsy specimens were analyzed for COX-2 by IHC. Patients with COX-2 expression ≥ 2, performance status of 0 to 2, and normal organ function were eligible. Chemotherapy was determined by histology: carboplatin plus pemetrexed for nonsquamous NSCLC and carboplatin plus gemcitabine for squamous histology. Patients were randomly assigned to celecoxib (400 mg twice per day; arm A) or placebo (arm B). The primary objective was to demonstrate improvement in progression-free survival in patients with COX-2 index ≥ 4 with hazard ratio of 0.645 with approximately 85% power at two-sided significance level of .05. Results The study was halted for futility after 312 of the planned 322 patients with COX-2 index ≥ 2 were randomly assigned. There were no significant differences between the groups (hazard ratio, 1.046 for COX-2 ≥ 4). Subset analyses evaluating histology, chemotherapy regimen, and incremental COX-2 expression did not demonstrate any advantage for COX-2 inhibition. Elevation of baseline urinary metabolite of prostaglandin E2, indicating activation of the COX-2 pathway, was a negative prognostic factor. Values above the third quartile may have been a predictive factor. Conclusion COX-2 expression by IHC failed to select patients who could benefit from selective COX-2 inhibition. Urinary metabolite of prostaglandin E2 may be able to identify patients who could benefit from COX-2 inhibition.

Dataset Information

Maintenance Sunitinib following Initial Platinum-Based Combination Chemotherapy in Advanced-Stage IIIB/IV Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Phase III Study-CALGB 30607 (Alliance).

Publications

Maintenance Sunitinib following Initial Platinum-Based Combination Chemotherapy in Advanced-Stage IIIB/IV Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Phase III Study-CALGB 30607 (Alliance).

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure