Citations

1020 Background: Trastuzumab-containing regimes have dramatically improved outcome of patients with HER2+ breast cancer. Efforts to improve efficacy and tolerability of combination regimens with this monoclonal antibody are important for patient care. Thus, we conducted a multi-institutional phase II study of a triplet combination in patients eligible to receive either first- or second-line treatment for HER2+ metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Methods: A phase II study designed to test that the true confirmed response rate (CRR) was at most 45% versus a true CRR of at least 65% was done (March 2005-June 2008). This design required that at least 25/45 confirmed responses in evaluable patients for the treatment to be considered promising. Patients received capecitabine 825 mg/m2 po (days 1–14), vinorelbine intravenously (IV) 25 mg/m2 days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks and trastuzumab IV 8mg/kg day 1, week 1, and then 6 mg/kg q 3 weeks. Tissue and blood have been collected for future studies on biomarkers. Results: 47 women were accrued, one patient cancelled participation prior to receiving any study drug, and another had a major protocol violation. 45 patients were evaluable and 30 (67%) achieved a confirmed response, (26 patients, 58% had a confirmed partial response and 4 patients, 9% had a confrimed complete response). Median progression free survival was 11.3 months (95% CI 8.4–23.2 months), median overall survival was 27.2 months (95% CI: 26.6-NA months), and among the 30 responders, the median duration of response time was 15.5 months (95% 7.7–26.1 months). The most common grade 3 events include neutropenia 61%, fatigue 13%, skin reaction-hand-foot 11%, and leukopenia 11%. Alopecia was not noted with this regimen. Conclusions: This triplet combination is effective, safe, and is promising in patients with HER2+ MBC. A phase III study should be conducted to compare the best doublet with this triplet combination whether this would lead to better clinical outcomes. [Table: see text]

577 Background: BAY 43–9006 targets the ras/raf signaling pathway and inhibits VEGFR-2, VEGFR-3 and or PDGFR-β growth factors. A study was conducted to assess anti-tumor activity and the toxicity profile in patients (pts) with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Methods: A two-stage phase II study was conducted with pts with MBC who had measurable disease and were candidates for 1 st or 2 nd line chemotherapy and had previously received an anthracycline and/or a taxane in the neoadjuvant, adjuvant, or metastatic setting. Pts started with a dose of 400 mg twice daily on days 1–28 of each 4 week cycle. Based on interval adverse events (AEs), a dose reduction was considered as 400 mg given one time daily. Primary endpoint was tumor response defined as a complete or partial response (PR) according to RESIST. The study required 40 pts, but was to be terminated if 0 or 1 responses occurred among 1 st 20 eligible pts. Results: 23 pts enrolled with a median age of 54 (range 37–70) but 3 were declared ineligible. All 23 pts were included in all analyses except efficacy analysis as stated per protocol. Fifteen (65%) had visceral metastasis; 22 (96%) had prior anthracycline treatment (tx); 16 (70%) had prior taxane tx.; 10 (44%) had received prior chemotherapy for metastatic disease and 14 (61%) had a prior relapse free interval of 12 months (mos) or more. Pts received tx for a median of 2 cycles (range 1–8) with a median follow-up of 7.2 mos. Dose reductions were due to dermatitis/skin rash (3), hand/foot skin reaction (2), hypertension (1) and cramping hands/feet (1). No grade 4 AEs occurred and grade 3 AEs included acne (2), hand/foot skin reaction (1), neutropenia (1), cough (1), wound infection (1), and prolonged PTT (1). Among the 20 pts eligible for efficacy analysis one pt (5%; 95% CI 0.5–20.5%) achieved a PR with duration of 3.6 mos and one pt achieved stable disease for at least 6 mos. The 6-month overall survival rate was 81% and the progression-free survival rates were 53% at 2 mos, 24% at 4 mos and 6% at 6 mos. Median time to progression was 2 mos. Based on the lack of sufficient response, we did not proceed with the 2nd stage of this study. Conclusion: Treatment with oral BAY 43–9006, while well tolerated, does not have sufficient activity to warrant further testing as a single agent in this disease setting. Author Disclosure Employment or Leadership Consultant or Advisory Role Stock Ownership Honoraria Research Funding Expert Testimony Other Remuneration Genentech Genentech

767 Background: The CORRECT trial (NCT01103323) showed that REG improves overall survival (OS) vs placebo (PBO) in patients with mCRC who failed approved therapies (OS HR 0.77; 1-sided p=0.0052; Grothey 2013). A total of 760 patients were randomized to REG (n=505) or PBO (n=255) in more than 100 centers across North America, Europe, Asia, and Australia. We conducted a post-hoc exploratory subgroup analysis of the 83 (11%) patients from 18 US centers. Methods: Eligible patients had an ECOG PS ≤1 and had received approved therapies, including a fluoropyrimidine, oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and bevacizumab, and if KRAS wild-type cetuximab and/or panitumumab. Data from the overall cohort, including US patients, are provided for perspective. Descriptive statistics are shown. Results: Of the 83 US patients, 36 (43%) were randomized to PBO and 47 (57%) to REG. Baseline characteristics of the US group were consistent with the overall cohort: median age in the US was 58 yr (range, 34 – 85) vs 61 (22 – 85) overall, 49% of US patients were ECOG PS1 (vs 46%), and 46% received ≤ 3 treatments for mCRC (vs 52%). KRAS status mutant/wild-type was 57%/34% in the US vs 57%/39% overall. All patients in the trial had prior bevacizumab and 57% of US patients also had prior cetuximab and/or panitumumab (vs 51% overall). However, higher proportion of patients in the US were Black (11% vs 2%), KRAS status unknown (10% vs 4%), and had colon as the primary disease site (82% vs 65%). Mean percentages of planned REG dose were similar (76% US vs 79% overall) and mean REG treatment duration was 3.1 mos in US vs 2.8 mos overall. Rates of dose modifications REG/PBO were 87%/47% in the US vs 76%/38% overall and grade ≥3 adverse events REG/PBO were 74%/64% vs 78%/49%, respectively. Based on 44 total death events, the HR for OS in the US subgroup was 0.46 (95%CI 0.25 – 0.84) favoring REG; median OS was 4.7 mos for PBO, but could not be estimated for REG due to censored data. However, this analysis was based on a relatively small sample size and event count. Conclusions: Patients treated in the CORRECT study in the US appear similar to the overall cohort and results are generally consistent with the overall findings of the trial. Clinical trial information: NCT01103323.

PURPOSE: This article summarizes the third step of a research program to identify variables that supplement the predictive power of the the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) for survival. The objective was to produce a simple, practical, stratification factor for phase III oncology clinical trials involving patients with advanced malignant disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A questionnaire was administered to 729 patients with metastatic colorectal or lung cancers. Patients provided a Karnofsky index and appetite rating while physicians provided a survival estimate and the ECOG-PS. Scores for each item were categorized as having a positive, neutral, or negative indication for survival. A patient was classified as having a relatively good prognosis if three or more of the four items showed a positive indication, a bad prognosis if three or more items were negative, and an uncertain prognosis otherwise (Good/Bad/Uncertain [GBU] index). RESULTS: The GBU index improved on the prognostic power of a Cox model quartile index and PS alone and increased the accuracy of survival classification estimates by 5% to 10% more than ECOG-PS alone. For patients with PS of 0 or 1, significant survival patterns exist between GBU groups (P= .002 and .0001, respectively). CONCLUSION: The GBU index may be recommended as a supplementary stratification factor for certain future phase III trials in metastatic lung or colorectal cancer where patient heterogeneity is a particular concern. The GBU represents a relatively modest increase to the cost and patient burden of a clinical trial given the additional control that is achieved over the potentially confounding concomitant to the treatment variable.

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 Molecular studies of colon cancer have provided insights into pathogenesis, yet it is unclear how important these markers are in predicting prognosis. This study investigated the prognostic significance of TUNEL, bcl-2, p53, proliferation marker Ki-67 and DNA mismatch repair (MMR) status in patients with Dukes' stage B2 and C colorectal adenocarcinomas. Patients and Methods Tumor tissue from 366 patients (75% Dukes' C, 25% Dukes' B2) from four randomized North Central Cancer Treatment Group phase III surgical adjuvant trials were used. Eighty-one percent of patients received adjuvant treatment, which was primarily fluorouracil (FU) based (90%). Tumor location was predominantly (87%) the colon. Terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase-mediated dUTP nick-end labeling (TUNEL), Ki-67, p53, bcl-2, and MMR were assayed using immunohistochemistry. Stage, grade, MMR, Ki-67, and previously determined flow cytometry markers (ploidy and S phase) were explored for associations with each other and with overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Results Univariately, stage B2, low grade, diploid, Ki-67 more than 27%, normal p53, and FU-based adjuvant treatment were significantly associated with improved OS and DFS (P < .05). After adjusting for stage, grade, and ploidy in multivariate analysis, Ki-67 remained significantly related to both OS and DFS (P < .01). Active FU-based adjuvant treatment was significant only for OS in this multivariate model. Neither bcl-2 nor TUNEL were significant. Conclusion This retrospective study indicates that Ki-67 and ploidy may have stronger prognostic impact on OS and DFS than other parameters investigated after adjusting for stage and tumor grade. Prospective studies to elucidate the mechanism and prognostic significance of these findings are necessary.