Schwartz, Lawrence H.

4005 Background: Patients (pts) with progressive advanced well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors arising outside of the pancreas have limited systemic treatment options. Pazopanib (PZ) is an oral multi-kinase inhibitor with activity against VEGFR-2,-3, PDGFR-α, and β, and c-KIT, with initial data suggesting efficacy in CARC. Methods: This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, phase II study of PZ (800 mg/day) versus placebo (PL) in progressive CARC. Key eligibility: low-intermediate grade CARC, radiologic progressive disease (PD) < 12 months (mo), and adequate end-organ function. Prior somatostatin analog (SSA) mandated for midgut tumors. Concurrent SSA allowed if previous PD on SSA documented. Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), defined as time from randomization to PD by central review or death. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR) and safety. The trial had 85% power to detect a difference in median PFS of 14 v 9 mo (hazard ratio [HR] 0.64) at one-sided alpha = 0.1. A stratified log-rank test based on the intend-to-treat (ITT) principle was used. Unblinding and crossover were allowed if PD confirmed by central review. Results: 171 (97 PZ, 74 PL) pts were randomized between 6/2013-10/2015: median age 63; 56% female; 66% small bowel primary; 87% concurrent SSA. Median follow-up of 31 mo; 112 (56 PZ, 56 PL) PFS events observed. 6 pts (4 PZ, 2 PL) remain on initial treatment. Median PFS was 11.6 and 8.5 mo in PZ and PL, respectively (HR = 0.53, 1-sided 90% upper confidence limit [UCL] 0.69, p = 0.0005) which crossed the pre-specified protocol efficacy boundary. 49 PL pts received PZ after PD. Median OS was 41 and 42 mo in PZ and PL, respectively (HR = 1.13, 1-sided 90% UCL 1.51, p = 0.70). RR data will be presented. Notable grade 3+ adverse events were (PZ v. PL %) hypertension (35 v. 8), fatigue (11 v. 4), ALT (10 v. 0), AST (10 v. 0), and diarrhea (7 v. 4). Conclusions: PZ compared to PL was associated with significant improvement in PFS in patients with progressive CARC. The results confirm that VEGF signaling pathway is a valid target for therapy in CARC. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882 https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org . Clinical trial information: NCT01841736.

PURPOSE The mode of action of targeted cancer agents (TCAs) differs from classic chemotherapy, which leads to concerns about the role of RECIST in evaluating tumor response in trials with TCAs. We investigated the performance of RECIST using a pooled database from 50 clinical trials with at least one TCA. METHODS We examined the impact of the number of target lesions (TLs) on within-patient variability of tumor response. The prognostic effect of TL response (at 12 weeks or on study on the basis of a maximum five TLs) on survival was studied through landmark and time-dependent Cox models adjusted for baseline tumor load, occurrence of new lesions, or unequivocal progression of nontarget disease. RESULTS Data were obtained from 23,259 patients with cancer (36% lung, 28% colorectal, 11% breast, and 25% other); 15,620 received TCAs, predominantly transduction or angiogenesis inhibitors, as a single agent (37%), combined with other TCAs (7%), or as chemotherapy (56%); 28% received chemotherapy only; and 5% received best supportive care or placebo. A total of 17,222 patients contributed to the analyses. Within-patient variability decreased with increasing number of TLs, similarly for TCAs (with/without chemotherapy) and chemotherapy only. Mixed responses occurred proportionally in all treatment classes. Landmark analyses showed an ordinal relationship between percentage change from baseline to 12 weeks and overall survival, and demonstrated a clear distinction between tumor shrinkage and progressive disease according to RECIST. Time-dependent analysis showed no marked improvement in the ability to predict survival on the basis of TL tumor growth compared with nontarget progression or new lesion occurrence, regardless of treatment. Similar results were seen for major tumor types and different classes of TCAs. CONCLUSION This work reinforces that RECIST version 1.1 perform well for response assessment of TCAs.

2534 Background: The Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) v1.1 were derived from an international collaborative effort supported by data from clinical trials (16 studies, 9147 patients) on cytotoxic chemotherapy (CT), providing a standard tool for response assessment. RECIST’s role has been questioned for TCA. Using a pooled individual patient database (IPD) from clinical trials performed by industry and cooperative groups, we assessed whether modifications to RECIST are required to evaluate antitumor activity of TCA. Methods: Data were collected from phase 2 and 3 clinical trials testing TCA in solid tumors. To study the occurrence of mixed responses, the variability of response of lesions within patients was studied. Furthermore, response was correlated with survival through landmark analyses and time dependent Cox models. Results: Clinical data were obtained from 23,259 patients, mainly with lung (36%), colorectal (28%) or breast cancer (11%). 15,620 patients (67%) received a TCA, mainly transduction or angiogenesis inhibitors, either as single agent (37%) or combined with other TCAs (7%) or CT (56%); 28% received CT only and 5% best supportive care or placebo. Within-patient variability reduced as the number of lesions used for response assessment increased, and did so similarly for TCAs (+/- CT) and CT. Mixed responses seemed to occur similarly across these treatment categories as well. Landmark analyses showed improving overall survival by % tumor shrinkage and a clear distinction between the effect of tumor shrinkage and progressive disease (PD) according to RECIST 1.1. This was confirmed by time dependent analysis. In addition target lesion growth showed no marked improvement in overall survival prediction over and above the other components of RECIST 1.1 PD (new lesions, non-target PD), regardless of treatment (TCA, CT or both) received. Similar results were seen focusing on major tumor types and classes of TCA. Conclusions: Using a large IPD dataset we demonstrated that RECIST 1.1 performs equally well for response assessment of TCA as for CT. No modifications are required.

Abstract As anticancer therapies designed to target specific molecular pathways have been developed, it has become critical to develop methods to assess the response induced by such agents. Although traditional, anatomic CT, and MRI examinations are useful in many settings, increasing evidence suggests that these methods cannot answer the fundamental biologic and physiologic questions essential for assessment and, eventually, prediction of treatment response in the clinical trial setting, especially in the critical period soon after treatment is initiated. To optimally apply advances in quantitative imaging methods to trials of targeted cancer therapy, new infrastructure improvements are needed that incorporate these emerging techniques into the settings where they are most likely to have impact. In this review, we first elucidate the needs for therapeutic response assessment in the era of molecularly targeted therapy and describe how quantitative imaging can most effectively provide scientifically and clinically relevant data. We then describe the tools and methods required to apply quantitative imaging and provide concrete examples of work making these advances practically available for routine application in clinical trials. We conclude by proposing strategies to surmount barriers to wider incorporation of these quantitative imaging methods into clinical trials and, eventually, clinical practice. Our goal is to encourage and guide the oncology community to deploy standardized quantitative imaging techniques in clinical trials to further personalize care for cancer patients and to provide a more efficient path for the development of improved targeted therapies. Clin Cancer Res; 22(2); 284–90. ©2016 AACR.