Flynn, Patrick J.

Abstract Purpose: Surrogate biomarkers are lacking for predicting or monitoring response to anti-angiogenesis therapies. We investigated whether circulating biomarkers (CBMs) of angiogenesis (i.e., bFGF, SDF-1α, HGF, sKIT, Ang-2, and PlGF) correlated with treatment efficacy in a pooled analysis of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) and recurrent glioblastoma multiforme (rGBM) patients (pts) treated with bevacizumab/sorafenib (BEV/SOR). Experimental procedures: Peripheral blood samples were obtained for CBM analyses from pts enrolled in the North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) phase II studies N054C (mCRC, n=75, Grothey, ASCO 2010) and N0776 (rGBM, n=54, Galanis, ASCO 2010). Blood collection time points were: baseline (BL), cycle 1 day 3 (C1D3), prior to treatment cycles 2, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, and after the pt went off study. Plasma CBM levels were determined by commercially-available ELISAs (R&D Systems) and performed according to manufacturer's instructions. For each CBM, a linear regression model that adjusted for study was used to evaluate the correlation with either progression-free survival (PFS) success/failure or progression within 14 days of the last blood draw for the following measures: absolute BL levels, log2 BL levels; C1D3 log2-fold change (FC) from BL, prior to cycle 2 log2-FC from BL, last draw log2-FC from BL, and last draw log2-FC from prior draw. Results summary: There appears to be no significant difference in the PFS or overall survival (OS) between the pts on these two studies; therefore, we pooled the patients from both studies for a combined analyses. We found no difference in absolute or log2 levels for any of the CBMs during the course of BEV/SOR treatment. In these pooled analyses, we found increased absolute and increased log2 BL SDF-1α levels were significantly correlated with PFS success (p=0.023 and p=0.02, respectively). After correcting for multiple comparisons (method of Benjamini & Hochberg) the p-values <0.05 had a false-discovery-rate of 41.4%. None of the other CBM measures were significantly correlated with either PFS success/failure or progression within 14 days of the last blood draw (all p>0.10). Conclusions: This study provides preliminary evidence that SDF-1α may be a useful CBM for determining treatment efficacy in these pts treated with BEV/SOR. Further prospective validation of SDF-1α for predicting pt progression with this treatment combination in advanced disease (e.g., mCRC and rGBM) appears warranted. Citation Format: {Authors}. {Abstract title} [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 103rd Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2012 Mar 31-Apr 4; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2012;72(8 Suppl):Abstract nr 5562. doi:1538-7445.AM2012-5562

Purpose The purpose of this trial was to evaluate the role of radiation therapy with concurrent gemcitabine (GEM) compared with GEM alone in patients with localized unresectable pancreatic cancer. Patients and Methods Patients with localized unresectable adenocarcinoma of the pancreas were randomly assigned to receive GEM alone (at 1,000 mg/m 2 /wk for weeks 1 to 6, followed by 1 week rest, then for 3 of 4 weeks) or GEM (600 mg/m 2 /wk for weeks 1 to 5, then 4 weeks later 1,000 mg/m 2 for 3 of 4 weeks) plus radiotherapy (starting on day 1, 1.8 Gy/Fx for total of 50.4 Gy). Measurement of quality of life using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–Hepatobiliary questionnaire was also performed. Results Of 74 patients entered on trial and randomly assigned to receive GEM alone (arm A; n = 37) or GEM plus radiation (arm B; n = 34), patients in arm B had greater incidence of grades 4 and 5 toxicities (41% v 9%), but grades 3 and 4 toxicities combined were similar (77% in A v 79% in B). No statistical differences were seen in quality of life measurements at 6, 15 to 16, and 36 weeks. The primary end point was survival, which was 9.2 months (95% CI, 7.9 to 11.4 months) and 11.1 months (95% CI, 7.6 to 15.5 months) for arms A and B, respectively (one-sided P = .017 by stratified log-rank test). Conclusion This trial demonstrates improved overall survival with the addition of radiation therapy to GEM in patients with localized unresectable pancreatic cancer, with acceptable toxicity.

Abstract Background: Treatment of aromatase refractory metastatic breast cancer (MBC) is difficult and challenging. Estrogen receptor (ER) resistance causes enhanced expression of the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF).Several studies have shown that the ER interacts with the VEGF pathway and is an important mechanism of resistance. Therefore we embarked on a phase II study of fulvestrant, a complete ER suppressor and bevacizumab, a well studied VEGF monoclonal antibody in aromatase refractory MBC patients. Methods: A single stage phase II study with an interim analysis of fulvestrant and bevacizumab was conducted with these objectives: 6 month progression-free survival rate (PFS), tumor response, toxicity, and overall survival. Regimen: fulvestrant 250 mg day1 and 15 (cycle 1) then day 1 (cycle 2 and beyond) and bevacizumab 10mg/kg days 1 and 15 of each 4 weeks is a cycle. Results: At the time of interim analysis, 11/20 evaluable patients achieved 3-month progression-free survival status while remaining on treatment for at least 3 months, not meeting the protocol specified efficacy requirements and thus halting accrual. 36 patients were enrolled from September 2007-December 2008; 33 patients were evaluable. Number of prior metastatic chemotherapy regimens: 0 in 26 patients and 1 in 7 patients. 22 (67%) patients received prior hormonal therapy in the metastatic setting. 18 (55%) had measurable disease. A median of 6 cycles (range 1-19) were administered. 12/33 evaluable patients (95% CI:20-55%) achieved 6-month progression-free survival status while remaining on treatment for a least 6 months. Among 18 patients with measurable disease, 2 (11%) patients CI:1.4-35%) had a confirmed tumor reponse (both PR). Additionally, 2 patients had stable disease for greater than 6 months, for a clinical benefit rate of 22%. Median follow up was 8.5 months (range 1.7-17.5 months). Median progression-free survival was 6.2 months (95% CI:5.4-10.1 months). The 6 -month overall survival rate was 84.8% (95% CI 73.5-98%). The median dose level administered was 250 mg for fulvestrant and 10 mg/kg for bevacizumab for cycles 1-19. The most common grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs) were hypertension 2 (6%), headache pain 2 (6%), and confusion 2 (6%). There was 1 grade 5 central nervous system hemorrhage. 13 (39%) patients experienced a grade 3 non-hematologic AE and 4 (12%) experience a grade 4+ non-hematologic AE. Conclusion: Fulvestrant/bevacizumab is safe and tolerable. Although this regimen did not meet its statistical endpoint, 22% of evaluable patients with aromatase refractory diesease achieved clinical benefit with minimal toxicity. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2009;69(24 Suppl):Abstract nr 4096.

Abstract Purpose. Rash occurs in >50% of patients prescribed epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors. This study was undertaken to determine whether sunscreen prevents or mitigates these rashes. Methods. This placebo-controlled, double-blinded trial enrolled rash-free patients starting an EGFR inhibitor. Patients were randomly assigned to sunscreen with a sun protection factor of 60 applied twice a day for 28 days versus placebo. They were then monitored for rash and quality of life (Skindex-16) during the 4-week intervention and for an additional 4 weeks. Results. Fifty-four patients received sunscreen, and 56 received placebo; the arms were balanced at baseline. During the 4-week intervention, physician-reported rash occurred in 38 (78%) and 39 (80%) sunscreen-treated and placebo-exposed patients, respectively (p = 1.00); no significant differences in rash rates emerged over the additional 4 weeks. There were no significant differences in rash severity, and patient-reported outcomes of rash yielded similar conclusions. Adjustment for sun intensity by geographical zone, season, and use of photosensitivity medications did not yield a significant difference in rash across study arms (p = .20). Quality of life scores declined but remained comparable between arms. Conclusions. Sunscreen, as prescribed in this trial, did not prevent or attenuate EGFR inhibitor–induced rash.

Abstract Background. The Bevacizumab Regimens’ Investigation of Treatment Effects (BRiTE) study is a prospective, observational cohort study designed to elucidate safety and effectiveness outcomes associated with bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy as used in clinical practice for first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Patients and Methods. Baseline characteristics, prespecified bevacizumab-related adverse events, and effectiveness data were collected from 1,953 mCRC patients who were receiving first-line treatment including bevacizumab at 248 U.S. sites. Results. At database lock, the median follow-up was 20.1 months. At baseline, 46% of patients were aged ≥65 years and 49% had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score ≥1. Fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin was the most common first-line chemotherapy regimen (56%). Overall rates of bevacizumab-related adverse events in the BRiTE study, such as gastrointestinal perforation (1.9%), arterial thromboembolic events (2%), grade 3–4 bleeding (2.2%), and de novo hypertension requiring medication (22%), were consistent with those reported in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of bevacizumab in first-line mCRC treatment. The median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) times were 9.9 (95% confidence interval [CI], 9.5–10.3) months and 22.9 (95% CI, 21.9–24.4) months, respectively. Conclusion. The median PFS and OS durations and safety profile of bevacizumab in the BRiTE study were similar to those in RCTs of bevacizumab plus chemotherapy in first-line mCRC patients. The observations from the BRiTE study complement and expand upon RCT data, providing clinical information in a large cohort of bevacizumab-treated patients and subgroups such as the elderly.

Purpose For nearly two decades, multiple retrospective reports, small prospective studies, and meta-analyses have arrived at conflicting results regarding the value of timing surgical intervention for breast cancer on the basis of menstrual cycle phase. We present the results of a multi–cooperative group, prospective, observational trial of menstrual cycle phase and outcome after breast cancer surgery, led by the North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) in collaboration with the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) and the International Breast Cancer Study Group (IBCSG). Patients and Methods Premenopausal women age 18 to 55 years, who were interviewed for menstrual history and who were surgically treated for stages I to II breast cancer, had serum drawn within 1 day of surgery for estradiol, progesterone, and luteinizing hormone levels. Menstrual history and hormone levels were used to determine menstrual phase: luteal, follicular, and other. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) rates were determined by Kaplan-Meier method and were compared by using the log-rank test and Cox proportional hazard modeling. Results Of 1,118 women initially enrolled, 834 women comprised the study cohort: 230 (28%) in luteal phase; 363 (44%) in follicular phase; and 241 grouped as other. During a median follow-up of 6.6 years, and in analysis that accounted for nodal disease, estrogen receptor status, adjuvant radiation therapy or chemotherapy, neither DFS nor OS differed with respect to menstrual phase. The 5-year DFS rates were 82.7%, 82.1%, and 79.2% for follicular, luteal, or other phases, respectively. Corresponding OS survival rates were 91.9%, 92.2%, and 91.8%, respectively. Conclusion When menstrual cycle phases were strictly defined, neither DFS nor OS differed between women who underwent surgery during the follicular phase versus the luteal phase. Nearly 30% of the patients did not meet criteria for either follicular- or luteal-phase categories.

Purpose Vorinostat, a histone deacetylase inhibitor, represents a rational therapeutic target in glioblastoma multiforme (GBM). Patients and Methods Patients with recurrent GBM who had received one or fewer chemotherapy regimens for progressive disease were eligible. Vorinostat was administered at a dose of 200 mg orally twice a day for 14 days, followed by a 7-day rest period. Results A total of 66 patients were treated. Grade 3 or worse nonhematologic toxicity occurred in 26% of patients and consisted mainly of fatigue (17%), dehydration (6%), and hypernatremia (5%); grade 3 or worse hematologic toxicity occurred in 26% of patients and consisted mainly of thrombocytopenia (22%). Pharmacokinetic analysis showed lower vorinostat maximum concentration and area under the curve (0 to 24 hours) values in patients treated with enzyme-inducing anticonvulsants, although this did not reach statistical significance. The trial met the prospectively defined primary efficacy end point, with nine of the first 52 patients being progression-free at 6 months. Median overall survival from study entry was 5.7 months (range, 0.7 to 28+ months). Immunohistochemical analysis performed in paired baseline and post-vorinostat treatment samples in a separate surgical subgroup of five patients with recurrent GBM showed post treatment increase in acetylation of histones H2B and H4 (four of five patients) and of histone H3 (three of five patients). Microarray RNA analysis in the same samples showed changes in genes regulated by vorinostat, such as upregulation of E-cadherin (P = .02). Conclusion Vorinostat monotherapy is well tolerated in patients with recurrent GBM and has modest single-agent activity. Histone acetylation analysis and RNA expression profiling indicate that vorinostat in this dose and schedule affects target pathways in GBM. Additional testing of vorinostat in combination regimens is warranted.

Purpose We conducted a cooperative group phase II study to assess antitumor activity and toxicity of sorafenib in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) who had received prior treatment for their disease. Patient and Methods Patients were eligible if they had measurable disease and had previously received an anthracycline and/or a taxane in the neoadjuvant, adjuvant, or metastatic setting. The primary end point of the study was tumor response per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST). The study was designed in two stages. Sorafenib was administered as 400 mg twice daily on days 1 through 28 of each 4-week cycle. Results Twenty-three patients were enrolled with a median age of 54 years (range, 37 to 70 years). Twenty-two (96%) had prior anthracycline treatment and 16 (70%) had prior taxane treatment. Patients received sorafenib for a median of two cycles (range, one to 15 cycles) with a median follow-up of 2.4 years (range, 2.2 to 2.6 years). There were no grade 4 toxicities and few grade 3 toxicities. Among the 20 patients eligible for efficacy analysis, no patients experienced a partial response or complete response per RECIST criteria. Thus, the trial stopped at the end of the first stage per study design. Two patients (10%; 90% CI, 1.8% to 28.3%) achieved stable disease lasting longer than 6 months. Conclusion Sorafenib as a single agent, although well tolerated, did not exhibit activity when measured by tumor shrinkage in patients with MBC who had received prior treatment. Further research should focus on combinations with standard therapy and end points more sensitive to effects of targeted agents, such as disease stabilization.

Purpose To update the recommendations for the use of bisphosphonates in the prevention and treatment of bone disease in multiple myeloma. The Update Committee expanded the guideline to include a discussion of osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ). Methods For the 2007 update, an Update Committee composed of members from the full panel completed a review and analysis of data published since 2002. Searches of Medline and the Cochrane Collaboration Library databases were performed. Recommendations For multiple myeloma patients who have, on plain radiograph(s) or imaging studies, lytic destruction of bone or spine compression fracture from osteopenia, intravenous pamidronate 90 mg delivered over at least 2 hours or zoledronic acid 4 mg delivered over at least 15 minutes every 3 to 4 weeks is recommended. Clodronate is an alternative bisphosphonate approved worldwide, except in the United States, for oral or intravenous administration. New dosing guidelines for patients with pre-existing renal impairment were added to the zoledronic acid package insert. Although no similar dosing guidelines are available for pamidronate, the Update Committee recommends that clinicians consider reducing the initial pamidronate dose in patients with pre-existing renal impairment. Zoledronic acid has not been studied in patients with severe renal impairment and is not recommended in this setting. The Update Committee suggests that bisphosphonate treatment continue for a period of 2 years. At 2 years, physicians should seriously consider discontinuing bisphosphonates in patients with responsive or stable disease, but further use is at the discretion of the treating physician. The Update Committee also discusses measures regarding ONJ.

Purpose To evaluate concordance between local and central laboratory HER2 testing results in patients from the North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) N9831 adjuvant trial of trastuzumab. Patients and Methods NCCTG N9831 is a randomized, phase III clinical trial comparing three drug regimens: doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide followed by paclitaxel with trastuzumab added concurrently, sequentially, or not at all as adjuvant therapy for women with HER2-positive resected breast cancer. Originally, patients were eligible if their tumors were HER2 positive by either local laboratory immunohistochemistry (IHC) or fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). A protocol modification in 2002 made central laboratory testing mandatory, with additional testing of discordant cases conducted by a reference laboratory. Concordance between local and central laboratory, and level of agreement between central and reference laboratory HER2 findings in discordant cases were examined. Results HER2 positivity was confirmed in 85.8% of 2,535 patients registered since March 2002. When local and central evaluation used the same methodology, concordance was 88.1% for FISH and 81.6% for a diagnostic test for presence of the HER2 protein. Among discordant cases examined at the reference laboratory, there was 94.3% agreement for IHC (0, 1+, 2+) and 95.2% agreement for FISH (not gene amplified). Conclusion There was a high degree of discordance between local and central testing for IHC and FISH, but a high degree of agreement between central and reference laboratories. These findings support the importance of using high-volume, experienced laboratories for HER2 testing to improve the process of selecting patients likely to benefit from trastuzumab therapy.