Dataset Information

Paclitaxel With and Without Pazopanib for Persistent or Recurrent Ovarian Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

ABSTRACT: Importance:Ovarian cancer is the leading cause of gynecologic cancer deaths in the United States. Pazopanib is an oral, multitarget kinase inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptors 1, 2, and 3; platelet-derived growth factor receptors ? and ?; and proto-oncogene receptor tyrosine kinase (c-KIT). Objective:To estimate the progression-free survival (PFS) hazard ratio (HR) of weekly paclitaxel and pazopanib compared with weekly paclitaxel and placebo in women with recurrent ovarian cancer. Secondary objectives included frequency and severity of adverse events, proportion responding, and overall survival (OS) in each arm. Translational research objectives included exploring the association between possible biomarkers and single-nucleotide polymorphisms in vascular endothelial growth factor A, interleukin 8, and hypoxia-inducible factor 1?; and PFS, OS, and proportion responding. Design, Setting, and Participants:A randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind phase 2 study was conducted at 26 participating institutions. Patients were enrolled between December 12, 2011, and April 22, 2013. Data were frozen on August 11, 2014. Participants were patients with persistent or recurrent epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal carcinoma with 1 to 3 prior regimens and performance status of 0 to 2. One hundred six patients enrolled; 100 were evaluable for toxic effects. Interventions:All patients received paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15 every 28 days and were randomized 1:1 to pazopanib 800 mg orally daily or placebo. Main Outcomes and Measures:The primary end point was PFS. The study was designed to detect a 37.5% reduction in the hazard with 80% power (??=?10%). Results:A total of 106 women (median age [range], 61 [35-87] years; 88 [83%] white) were enrolled. Study arms were well balanced for age, performance status, measurable disease, and prior bevacizumab. Proportion responding was 14 of 44 (31.8%) vs 10 of 44 (22.7%) for pazopanib plus paclitaxel vs paclitaxel alone. Median PFS was 7.5 vs 6.2 months for pazopanib plus paclitaxel vs paclitaxel alone, respectively (HR, 0.84; 90% CI, 0.57-1.22; P?=?.20). Median OS was 20.7 vs 23.3 months for pazopanib plus paclitaxel vs paclitaxel alone (HR, 1.04; 90% CI, 0.60-1.79; P?=?.90). Severe hypertension was more common on the pazopanib plus paclitaxel arm (relative risk, 12.0; 95% CI, 1.62-88.84). More patients discontinued treatment on the paclitaxel arm for disease progression (34 of 52 [65.4%] vs 17 of 54 [31.5%]), and more on the pazopanib plus paclitaxel arm for adverse events (20 of 54 [37%] vs 5 of 52 [9.6%]). No association was found between single-nucleotide polymorphisms (interleukin 8 and hypoxia-inducible factor 1?) and OS and proportion responding. Patients with VEGFA CC genotype may be more resistant to weekly paclitaxel than those with the AC or AA genotype, with 1 of 14 (7%), 3 of 15 (20%), and 4 of 8 (50%) responding, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance:The combination of pazopanib plus paclitaxel is not superior to paclitaxel in women with recurrent ovarian cancer. Trial Registration:clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01468909.

SUBMITTER: Richardson DL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5838582 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Paclitaxel With and Without Pazopanib for Persistent or Recurrent Ovarian Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Richardson Debra L DL Sill Michael W MW Coleman Robert L RL Sood Anil K AK Pearl Michael L ML Kehoe Siobhan M SM Carney Michael E ME Hanjani Parviz P Van Le Linda L Zhou Xun C XC Alvarez Secord Angeles A Gray Heidi J HJ Landrum Lisa M LM Lankes Heather A HA Hu Wei W Aghajanian Carol C

JAMA oncology 20180201 2

<h4>Importance</h4>Ovarian cancer is the leading cause of gynecologic cancer deaths in the United States. Pazopanib is an oral, multitarget kinase inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptors 1, 2, and 3; platelet-derived growth factor receptors α and β; and proto-oncogene receptor tyrosine kinase (c-KIT).<h4>Objective</h4>To estimate the progression-free survival (PFS) hazard ratio (HR) of weekly paclitaxel and pazopanib compared with weekly paclitaxel and placebo in women with rec ...[more]

PMID: 29242937

Similar Datasets

Project description:Importance:There is an unmet medical need for the treatment of recurrent ovarian cancer, and new approaches are needed to improve progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival. Objective:This phase 1/2 study evaluated the activity of alisertib in combination with weekly paclitaxel in patients with breast (phase 1) and ovarian cancer (phase 1 and phase 2). Design, Setting, and Participants:An open-label phase 1 and randomized phase 2 clinical trial conducted from April 16, 2010, for phase 1 and March 28, 2012, to August 12, 2013, for phase 2 was conducted at 33 sites (United States, France, and Poland). Data are reported from a cutoff date of August 12, 2014, with a median duration of follow-up of 7.2 months in the alisertib plus paclitaxel arm and 4.6 months in the paclitaxel arm. A total of 191 women with advanced breast (phase 1 only) or recurrent ovarian cancer were enrolled, including 142 patients randomized to alisertib plus paclitaxel (n?=?73) or paclitaxel alone (n?=?69) in the phase 2 study. Interventions:Patients were randomized 1:1 stratified by platinum-free interval (refractory, 0-6 months, 6-12 months) and prior weekly taxane treatment (yes, no) to receive alisertib 40 mg twice per day orally and 3 days on and 4 days off for 3 weeks, plus paclitaxel (60 mg/m2 intravenously, days 1, 8, and 15), or weekly paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 intravenously in 28-day cycles. Main Outcomes and Measures:Primary endpoint was PFS; primary efficacy analysis and safety analysis used modified intention to treat (mITT) population (all randomized patients who received ?1 dose of study drug). Results:The median age for the 191 patients enrolled in phase 1 was 59 (range, 29-75) years. The median age for the 142 patients enrolled in phase 2 was 63 (range, 30-81) years for patients receiving alisertib plus paclitaxel and 61 (range, 41-81) years for patients receiving paclitaxel. At data cutoff, 107 (75%) patients had a documented PFS event; 52 (71%) in the alisertib plus paclitaxel arm, and 55 (80%) in the paclitaxel arm. Median PFS was 6.7 months with alisertib plus paclitaxel vs 4.7 months with paclitaxel (HR, 0.75; 80% CI, 0.58-0.96; P?=?.14; 2-sided P value cutoff?=?.20 to be considered worthy of further investigation). Drug-related grade 3 or higher adverse events were reported in 63 (86%) vs 14 (20%) patients in the alisertib plus paclitaxel and paclitaxel arms, including 56 (77%) vs 7 (10%) neutropenia, 18 (25%) vs 0 stomatitis, and 10 (14%) vs 2 (3%) anemia; 54 (74%) vs 17 (25%) had adverse events leading to dose reductions. Two patients died during the study (1 in each arm); neither death was considered related to study drug. Conclusions and Relevance:The primary endpoint, PFS, significantly favored alisertib plus paclitaxel over paclitaxel alone. Further investigation is warranted. Trial Registration:ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01091428.

Project description:BackgroundTreatment outcomes remain poor in recurrent platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. Enadenotucirev, a tumor-selective and blood stable adenoviral vector, has demonstrated a manageable safety profile in phase 1 studies in epithelial solid tumors.MethodsWe conducted a multicenter, open-label, phase 1 dose-escalation and dose-expansion study (OCTAVE) to assess enadenotucirev plus paclitaxel in patients with platinum-resistant epithelial ovarian cancer. During phase 1a, the maximum tolerated dose of intraperitoneally administered enadenotucirev monotherapy (three doses; days 1, 8 and 15) was assessed using a 3+3 dose-escalation model. Phase 1b included a dose-escalation and an intravenous dosing dose-expansion phase assessing enadenotucirev plus paclitaxel. For phase 1a/b, the primary objective was to determine the maximum tolerated dose of enadenotucirev (with paclitaxel in phase 1b). In the dose-expansion phase, the primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Additional endpoints included response rate and T-cell infiltration.ResultsOverall, 38 heavily pretreated patients were enrolled and treated. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed at any doses. However, frequent catheter complications led to the discontinuation of intraperitoneal dosing during phase 1b. Intravenous enadenotucirev (1×1012 viral particles; days 1, 3 and 5 every 28-days for two cycles) plus paclitaxel (80 mg/m2; days 9, 16 and 23 of each cycle) was thus selected for dose-expansion. Overall, 24/38 (63%) patients experienced at least 1 Grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE); most frequently neutropenia (21%). Six patients discontinued treatment due to TEAEs, including one patient due to a grade 2 treatment-emergent serious AE of catheter site infection (intraperitoneal enadenotucirev monotherapy). Among the 20 patients who received intravenous enadenotucirev plus paclitaxel, 4-month PFS rate was 64% (median 6.2 months), objective response rate was 10%, 35% of patients achieved stable disease and 65% of patients had a reduction in target lesion burden at ≥1 time point. Five out of six patients with matched pre-treatment and post-treatment biopsies treated with intravenous enadenotucirev plus paclitaxel had increased (mean 3.1-fold) infiltration of CD8 +T cells in post-treatment biopsies.ConclusionsIntravenously dosed enadenotucirev plus paclitaxel demonstrated manageable tolerability, an encouraging median PFS and increased tumor immune-cell infiltration in platinum-resistant ovarian cancer.Trial registration numberNCT02028117.

Project description:ImportanceElevated expression of AURKA adversely affects prognosis in estrogen receptor (ER)-positive and ERBB2 (formerly HER2)-negative and triple-negative breast cancer and is associated with resistance to taxanes.ObjectiveTo compare paclitaxel alone vs paclitaxel plus alisertib in patients with ER-positive and ERBB2-negative or triple-negative metastatic breast cancer (MBC).Design, setting, and participantsIn this randomized clinical trial conducted with the US Oncology Network, participants were randomized to intravenous (IV) paclitaxel 90 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 on a 28-day cycle or IV paclitaxel 60 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 plus oral alisertib 40 mg twice daily on days 1 to 3, 8 to 10, and 15 to 17 on a 28-day cycle. Stratification was by prior neo or adjuvant taxane and by line of metastatic therapy. Eligible patients were those who had undergone endocrine therapy, 0 or 1 prior chemotherapy regimens for MBC, more than 12 months treatment-free interval from neo or adjuvant taxane therapy, and with measurable or evaluable lytic bone-disease. Data were analyzed from March 2019 through May 2019.Main outcomes and measuresThe main outcome was progression-free survival (PFS) with secondary end points of overall survival (OS), overall response rate, clinical benefit rate, safety, and analysis of archival breast cancer tissues for molecular markers associated with benefit from alisertib.ResultsA total of 174 patients were randomized, including with 86 randomized to paclitaxel and 88 patients randomized to paclitaxel plus alisertib, and 169 patients received study treatment. The final cohort included 139 patients with a median (interquartile range [IQR]) age of 62 (27-84) years with ER-positive and ERBB2-negative MBC, with 70 randomized to paclitaxel and 69 randomized to paclitaxel plus alisertib. The TNBC cohort closed with only 35 patients enrolled due to slow accrual and were not included in efficacy analyses. The median (IQR) follow-up was 22 (10.6-25.1) months, and median (IQR) PFS was 10.2 (3.8-15.7) months with paclitaxel plus alisertib vs 7.1 (3.8-10.6) months with paclitaxel alone (HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.37-0.84; P = .005). Median (IQR) OS was 26.3 (12.4-37.2) months for patients who received paclitaxel plus alisertib vs 25.1 (11.0-31.4) months for paclitaxel alone (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.58-1.38; P = .61). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 56 patients (84.8%) receiving paclitaxel plus alisertib vs 34 patients (48.6%) receiving paclitaxel alone. The main grade 3 or 4 adverse events with paclitaxel plus alisertib vs paclitaxel alone were neutropenia (50 patients [59.5%] vs 14 patients [16.4%]), anemia (8 patients [9.5%] vs 1 patient [1.2%]), diarrhea (9 patients [10.7%] vs 0 patients), and stomatitis or oral mucositis (13 patients [15.5%] vs 0 patients). One patient receiving paclitaxel plus alisertib died of sepsis.Conclusions and relevanceThis randomized clinical trial found that the addition of oral alisertib to a reduced dose of weekly paclitaxel significantly improved PFS compared with paclitaxel alone, and toxic effects with paclitaxel plus alisertib were manageable with alisertib dose reduction. These data support further evaluation of alisertib in patients with ER-positive, ERBB2-negative MBC.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02187991.

Project description:ImportanceAutophagy is a mechanism of treatment resistance to chemotherapy that has a role in the maintenance of pancreatic cancer. Hydroxychloroquine sulfate (HCQ) is an inhibitor of autophagy that inhibits the fusion of the autophagosome to the lysosome.ObjectiveTo determine whether HCQ improves overall survival at 1 year in combination with gemcitabine hydrochloride and nab-paclitaxel (GA) among patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer.Design, setting, and participantsOpen-label, phase 2 randomized clinical trial conducted between March 18, 2013, and November 16, 2017, at the University of Pennsylvania, HonorHealth, and The Johns Hopkins University among 112 patients with previously untreated metastatic or advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, and adequate marrow and organ function. All efficacy analyses were performed for the intention-to-treat population.InterventionsPatients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive GA with or without HCQ. All patients received standard doses of GA, and those randomized to receive HCQ were treated continuously with 600 mg orally twice daily.Main outcome and measureOverall survival at 1 year.ResultsA total of 112 patients (45 women and 67 men; median age, 65 years; range, 43-86 years) were enrolled; 55 were randomized to receive GA plus HCQ, and 57 to receive GA. Overall survival at 12 months was 41% (95% CI, 27%-53%) in the HCQ group and 49% (95% CI, 35%-61%) in the non-HCQ group. Median progression-free survival was 5.7 months (95% CI, 4.0-9.3 months) in the HCQ group and 6.4 months (95% CI, 4.5-7.6 months) in the non-HCQ group. Median overall survival was 11.1 months (95% CI, 9.0-14.2 months) in the HCQ group and 12.1 months (95% CI, 9.3-15.5 months) in the non-HCQ group. Overall response rate was 38.2% (n = 21) in the HCQ group and 21.1% (n = 12) in the non-HCQ group (P = .047). Treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events that differed between the HCQ and non-HCQ groups were neutropenia (23 of 54 [42.6%] vs 12 of 53 [22.6%]), anemia (2 of 54 [3.7%] vs 9 of 53 [17.0%]), fatigue (4 of 54 [7.4%] vs 0), nausea (5 of 54 [9.3%] vs 0), peripheral neuropathy (7 of 54 [13.0%] vs 3 of 53 [5.7%]), visual changes (3 of 54 [5.6%] vs 0), and neuropsychiatric symptoms (3 of 54 [5.6%] vs 0).Conclusions and relevanceThe addition of HCQ to block autophagy did not improve the primary end point of overall survival at 12 months. These data do not support the routine use of GA plus HCQ for metastatic pancreatic cancer in the absence of a biomarker. However, improvement seen in the overall response rate with HCQ may indicate a role for HCQ in the locally advanced setting, where tumor response may permit resection.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01506973.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The prognosis of patients with recurrent, platinum-resistant epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is poor. There is no standard treatment available. Emerging evidence suggests a major role for antiangiogenic treatment modalities in EOC, in particular in combination with the metronomic application of low dose chemotherapy. The novel, investigational oral antiangiogenic agent pazopanib targeting vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR), platelet-derived growth factor receptor (PDGFR) and c-kit is currently being studied in different tumour types and is already used as first line therapy in recurrent renal cell carcinoma. A combined therapy consisting of pazopanib and metronomic oral cyclophosphamide may offer a well-tolerable treatment option to patients with recurrent, pretreated EOC. METHODS/DESIGN:This study is designed as a multicenter phase I/II trial evaluating the optimal dose for pazopanib (phase I) as well as activity and tolerability of a combination regimen consisting of pazopanib and metronomic cyclophosphamide in the palliative treatment of patients with recurrent, platinum-resistant, pre-treated ovarian cancer (phase II). The patient population includes patients with histologically or cytologically confirmed diagnosis of EOC, cancer of the fallopian tube or peritoneal cancer which is platinumresistant or -refractory. Patients must have measurable disease according to RECIST criteria and must have failed available standard chemotherapy. Primary objectives are determination of the optimal doses for pazopanib (phase I) and the overall response rate according to RECIST criteria (phase II). Secondary objectives are time to progression, overall survival, safety and tolerability. The treatment duration is until disease progression or intolerability of study drug regimen (with a maximum of 13 cycles up to 52 weeks per subject). DISCUSSION:The current phase I/II trial shall clarify the potential of the multitargeting antiangiogenic tyrosinkinaseinhibitor GW 786034 (pazopanib) in combination with oral cyclophosphamide as salvage treatment in patients with recurrent, pretreated ovarian cancer.

Project description:PurposePlatinum-based chemotherapy is the standard of care for platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer, but complications from repeated platinum therapy occur. We assessed the activity of two all-oral nonplatinum alternatives, olaparib or olaparib/cediranib, versus platinum-based chemotherapy.Patients and methodsNRG-GY004 is an open-label, randomized, phase III trial conducted in the United States and Canada. Eligible patients had high-grade serous or endometrioid platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to platinum-based chemotherapy, olaparib, or olaparib/cediranib. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) in the intention-to-treat population. Secondary end points included activity within germline BRCA-mutated or wild-type subgroups and patient-reported outcomes (PROs).ResultsBetween February 04, 2016, and November 13, 2017, 565 eligible patients were randomly assigned. Median PFS was 10.3 (95% CI, 8.7 to 11.2), 8.2 (95% CI, 6.6 to 8.7), and 10.4 (95% CI, 8.5 to 12.5) months with chemotherapy, olaparib, and olaparib/cediranib, respectively. Olaparib/cediranib did not improve PFS versus chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR] 0.86; 95% CI, 0.66 to 1.10; P = .077). In women with germline BRCA mutation, the PFS HR versus chemotherapy was 0.55 (95% CI, 0.32 to 0.94) for olaparib/cediranib and 0.63 (95% CI, 0.37 to 1.07) for olaparib. In women without a germline BRCA mutation, the PFS HR versus chemotherapy was 0.97 (95% CI, 0.73 to 1.30) for olaparib/cediranib and 1.41 (95% CI, 1.07 to 1.86) for olaparib. Hematologic adverse events occurred more commonly with chemotherapy; however, nonhematologic adverse events were higher with olaparib/cediranib. In 489 patients evaluable for PROs, patients receiving olaparib/cediranib scored on average 1.1 points worse on the NFOSI-DRS-P subscale (97.5% CI, -2.0 to -0.2, P = .0063) versus chemotherapy; no difference between olaparib and chemotherapy was observed.ConclusionCombination olaparib/cediranib did not improve PFS compared with chemotherapy and resulted in reduced PROs. Notably, in patients with a germline BRCA mutation, both olaparib and olaparib/cediranib had significant clinical activity.

Dataset Information

Paclitaxel With and Without Pazopanib for Persistent or Recurrent Ovarian Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Publications

Paclitaxel With and Without Pazopanib for Persistent or Recurrent Ovarian Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets