08.12.2012 Views

Annual Meeting Proceedings II - Newly Released Abstracts for

Annual Meeting Proceedings II - Newly Released Abstracts for

Annual Meeting Proceedings II - Newly Released Abstracts for

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

BREAST CANCER—HER2/ER<br />

LBA1 Plenary Session, Sun, 1:00 PM-4:00 PM<br />

Primary results from EMILIA, a phase <strong>II</strong>I study of trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1)<br />

versus capecitabine (X) and lapatinib (L) in HER2-positive locally advanced or<br />

metastatic breast cancer (MBC) previously treated with trastuzumab (T) and a<br />

taxane.<br />

Kimberly L. Blackwell, David Miles, Luca Gianni, Ian E. Krop, Manfred Welslau, José Baselga,<br />

Mark D. Pegram, Do-Youn Oh, Veronique Dieras, Steven R. Olsen, Liang Fang, Michael W. Lu,<br />

Ellie Guardino, Sunil Verma; Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC; Mount Vernon Cancer Centre,<br />

Middlesex, United Kingdom; San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy; Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston,<br />

MA; Praxis Aschaffenburg, Aschaffenburg, Germany; Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center and<br />

Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA; University of Miami Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center,<br />

Miami, FL; Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, South Korea;<br />

Department of Medical Oncology, Institut Curie, Paris, France; Genentech, South San Francisco, CA;<br />

Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada<br />

Background: T-DM1 is an antibody-drug conjugate comprising T, a stable linker, and the potent cytotoxic<br />

agent DM1; it incorporates the antitumor activities of T and the HER2-targeted delivery of DM1. Methods:<br />

EMILIA is a randomized study of T-DM1 vs XL, the only approved combination <strong>for</strong> T-refractory HER2�<br />

MBC. Patients (pts) received T-DM1 (3.6 mg/kg IV q3w) or X (1000 mg/m 2 PO bid, days 1–14 q3w) �<br />

L (1,250 mg PO daily) until progressive disease (PD) or unmanageable toxicity. Pts had confirmed HER2�<br />

MBC (IHC3� and/or FISH�), and prior therapy with T and a taxane. Primary end points were PFS by<br />

independent review, OS and safety. An interim OS analysis (efficacy boundary: HR� 0.617; p�0.0003)<br />

was planned at the time of the final PFS analysis. Results: 991 pts were enrolled; 978 received treatment.<br />

Median (med) durations of follow-up were 12.9 (T-DM1) and 12.4 (XL) months (mo). Baseline<br />

demographics, prior therapy and disease characteristics were balanced. There was a significant improvement<br />

in PFS favoring T-DM1 (med 9.6 vs 6.4 mo; HR�0.650 [95% CI, 0.549–0.771]; p �0.0001). The med<br />

T-DM1 OS was not reached vs 23.3 mo (HR�0.621 [95% CI, 0.475–0.813]; p�0.0005); the interim<br />

efficacy boundary was not crossed. T-DM1 was well tolerated with no unexpected safety signals. The most<br />

common grade �3 adverse events (AEs) per treatment were <strong>for</strong> T-DM1: thrombocytopenia (12.9% vs<br />

0.2%), increased AST (4.3% vs 0.8%), and increased ALT (2.9% vs 1.4%); <strong>for</strong> XL: diarrhea (20.7% vs<br />

1.6%), palmar plantar erythrodysesthesia (16.4% vs 0) and vomiting (4.5% vs 0.8%). The table lists other<br />

end points. Conclusions: T-DM1 conferred a significant and clinically meaningful improvement in PFS<br />

compared with XL. Other end points support T-DM1 as an active and well-tolerated novel therapy <strong>for</strong><br />

HER2� advanced BC.<br />

T-DM1 XL<br />

OS, % (95% CI)<br />

1-year 84.7 (80.76–88.55) 77.0 (72.40–81.50)<br />

2-year<br />

Objective response (OR)<br />

65.4 (58.65–72.15) 47.5 (39.20–55.89)<br />

% (95% CI) 43.6 (38.6–48.6) 30.8 (26.3–35.7)<br />

Duration of response<br />

in pts with OR,<br />

med mo (95% CI)<br />

12.6 (8.38–20.76) 6.5 (5.45–7.16)<br />

Dose reduction, % 16.3 X 53.4<br />

L 27.3<br />

AEs > grade 3, % 40.8 57.0<br />

© 2012 American Society of Clinical Oncology. Reprinted with permission.


2 Plenary Session, Sun, 1:00 PM-4:00 PM<br />

Long-term follow-up results of EORTC 26951: A randomized phase <strong>II</strong>I study on<br />

adjuvant PCV chemotherapy in anaplastic oligodendroglial tumors (AOD).<br />

Martin J. Van Den Bent, Khê Hoang-Xuan, Alba Ariela Brandes, Johan M Kros,<br />

Mathilde C.M. Kouwenhoven, Martin J. B. Taphoorn, Jean-Yves Delattre, Hans J.J.B. Bernsen,<br />

Marc Frenay, Cees Tijssen, Wolfgang Grisold, Laszlo Sipos, Roelien H. Enting, Winand N.M. Dinjens,<br />

Pim French, Charles J Vecht, Anouk Allgeier, Denis A. Lacombe, Thierry Gorlia; Erasmus University<br />

Medical Center, Daniel den Hoed Cancer Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands; Groupe Hospitalier Pitié-<br />

Salpêtrière, Paris, France; Medical Oncology Department, Bellaria-Maggiore Hospital, Azienda USL of<br />

Bologna, Bologna, Italy; Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands; Erasmus University Medical<br />

Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands; Medical Center Haaglanden/VU Medical Center, The Hague/Amsterdam,<br />

Netherlands; Pitie-Salpetriere Hospital-Pierre et Marie Curie Paris VI University, Paris, France; Canisius<br />

Wilhelmina Ziekenhuis, Nijmegen, Netherlands; Anticancer Center, Centre Antoine-Lacassagne, Nice,<br />

France; Elisabeth Gasthuis, Tilburg, Netherlands; Kaiser Franz Josef Hospital, Vienna, Austria; Neurooncologist<br />

National Institute of Neurosciences, Budapest, Hungary; Universitair Medisch Centrum Groningen,<br />

Groningen, Netherlands; Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, Netherlands; Medical Center The Hague, The<br />

Hague, Netherlands; European Organisation <strong>for</strong> Research and Treatment of Cancer Headquarters,<br />

Brussels, Belgium<br />

Background: AOD are chemotherapy-sensitive tumors especially if 1p/19q co-deleted. Between 1995 and<br />

2002 the EORTC Brain Tumor Group conducted a prospective phase <strong>II</strong>I study on adjuvant procarbazine,<br />

CCNU and vincristine chemotherapy (PCV) in AOD. We now present long-term follow-up. Methods:<br />

Patients (pts) with locally diagnosed newly diagnosed AOD were randomized between radiotherapy (RT, 33<br />

x 1.8 Gy) and the same RT followed by 6 cycles of standard PCV (RT/PCV). Primary endpoints were<br />

overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). 1p/19q status, IDH status and MGMT promoter<br />

methylation were determined in 300, 167, and 186 pts respectively. Results: Between 1996 and 2002, 368<br />

pts were included. At the time of analysis 281 pts (76.4%) had died. Median PFS after RT/PCV was<br />

significantly longer compared to RT alone (24.3 months versus 13.21 months, hazard ratio [HR] 0.66, [95%<br />

confidence interval (95% CI) 0.52, 0.83]). More RT arm patients received chemotherapy at progression<br />

(75% vs 53%). Median OS was also significantly prolonged in the RT/PCV arm (42.3 months vs 30.6<br />

months <strong>for</strong> the RT arm, HR 0.75 [95% CI 0.60, 0.95]). 1p/19q co-deleted patients (n � 76) treated with<br />

RT/PCV had improved OS compared to RT arm pts (median OS not reached vs 113 months; HR 0.54, p<br />

� 0.0487). In the 224 patients without 1p/19q co-deletion the difference in OS was non-significant (OS<br />

RT/PCV arm 25 months vs 22 months in the RT arm, HR 0.82, p � 0.18; test <strong>for</strong> interaction p � 0.22).<br />

There was a slight trend towards improved OS in MGMT methylated and IDH mutated tumors versus<br />

unmethylated and IDH wild type tumors (Table). Conclusions: The addition of PCV to RT increases PFS<br />

and OS in AOD. Pts with 1p/19q co-deletion appear to benefit most from the addition of PCV, with a trend<br />

<strong>for</strong> improved OS in pts with MGMT methylation and IDH mutations.<br />

Molecular features and the HR reduction <strong>for</strong> OS in the RT/PCV arm.<br />

Feature Status N HR 95% CI Status N HR 95% CI P<br />

1p/19q Co-deleted 76 0.54 0.29, 1.01 Intact 224 0.82 0.61, 1.10 0.22<br />

MGMT Methylated 132 0.67 0.44, 1.01 Unmethylated 54 0.80 0.46, 1.42 0.6<br />

IDH Mutated 77 0.59 0.33, 1.07 Wild type 90 0.72 0.46, 1.11 0.58<br />

Abbreviations: n: number of pts; p: p value interaction test.<br />

CENTRAL NERVOUS SYSTEM TUMORS<br />

© 2012 American Society of Clinical Oncology. Reprinted with permission.


LYMPHOMA AND PLASMA CELL DISORDERS<br />

3 Plenary Session, Sun, 1:00 PM-4:00 PM<br />

Bendamustine plus rituximab (B-R) versus CHOP plus rituximab (CHOP-R) as<br />

first-line treatment in patients with indolent and mantle cell lymphomas (MCL):<br />

Updated results from the StiL NHL1 study.<br />

Mathias J. Rummel, Norbert Niederle, Georg Maschmeyer, Andre G. Banat, Ulrich von Gruenhagen,<br />

Christoph Losem, Dorothea Kofahl-Krause, Gerhard Heil, Manfred Welslau, Christina Balser,<br />

Ulrich Kaiser, Eckhart Weidmann, Heinz A. Duerk, Harald Ballo, Martina Stauch, Juergen Barth,<br />

Axel Hinke, Wolfram Brugger, Study Group Indolent Lymphomas (StiL); Universitaetsklinik, Giessen,<br />

Germany; Klinikum Leverkusen, Leverkusen, Germany; Potsdam Klinikum, Potsdam, Germany; Outpatient<br />

Clinic, Cottbus, Germany; Onkologische Praxis, Neuss, Germany; Medizinische Hochschule Hannover,<br />

Hannover, Germany; Kreiskrankenhaus Lüdenscheid, Luedenscheid, Germany; Praxis Aschaffenburg,<br />

Aschaffenburg, Germany; Onkologische Praxis, Marburg, Germany; St. Bernward Krankenhaus,<br />

Hildesheim, Germany; Krankenhaus Nordwest, Frankfurt, Germany; St. Marien-Hospital Hamm, Hamm,<br />

Germany; Onkologische Praxis, Offenbach, Germany; Outpatient Department, Kronach, Germany; WisP<br />

Clinical Research Organisation, Langenfeld, Germany; Schwarzwald-Baar Clinic, Villingen-<br />

Schwenningen, Germany<br />

Background: This multicenter, randomized, phase <strong>II</strong>I study compared B-R and CHOP-R as first-line<br />

treatment in indolent lymphoma and MCL and was presented at ASH 2009 including a comprehensive<br />

safety analysis. Here we present an updated analysis with a cut-off date <strong>for</strong> 31 Oct 2011. Methods: 549<br />

patients (pts) with indolent or MCL were randomized to receive B-R or CHOP-R <strong>for</strong> a max of 6 cycles. The<br />

primary endpoint was PFS. Results: 514 pts randomized pts were evaluable (261 B-R; 253 CHOP-R).<br />

Patient characteristics were well balanced between arms; median age was 64 years. At a median follow-up<br />

of 45 months, PFS was significantly prolonged with B-R compared with CHOP-R (HR 0.58, 95% CI<br />

0.44–0.74; P�0.001). Median PFS was 69.5 versus 31.2 months, respectively. The PFS benefit with B-R<br />

was maintained in all histological subtypes except marginal zone lymphoma. The PFS benefit with B-R was<br />

independent of age; HR 0.52 (P�0.002) in pts �60 years (n�199), and HR 0.62 (P�0.002) in pts �60 years<br />

(n�315). In pts with normal LDH (62%), PFS was significantly prolonged with B-R compared with<br />

CHOP-R (P�0.001), while in the elevated LDH group (38%) PFS was numerically, but not significantly<br />

increased with B-R compared with CHOP-R (P�0.118). In patients with follicular lymphoma, FLIPI<br />

subgroups defined by 0–2 factors (favorable) and 3–5 factors (unfavorable) had a longer PFS with B-R than<br />

with CHOP-R (P�0.043 and P�0.068 <strong>for</strong> the favorable and unfavorable FLIPI subgroups, respectively).<br />

Seventy four salvage treatments had been initiated in the B-R group; compared with 116 in the CHOP-R<br />

group, of those in the CHOP-R group 52 pts received B-R as salvage regimen. Overall survival did not differ<br />

between the treatment arms, with 43 and 45 deaths in the B-R and CHOP-R arms, respectively. Twenty<br />

secondary malignancies were observed in the B-R group compared with 23 in the CHOP-R group, with 1<br />

hematological malignancy in each group (1 MDS in B-R, 1 AML in CHOP-R). Conclusions: In patients<br />

with previously untreated indolent lymphoma, and elderly patients with MCL, B-R demonstrates a PFS<br />

benefit and improved tolerability compared with CHOP-R.<br />

© 2012 American Society of Clinical Oncology. Reprinted with permission.


GENITOURINARY CANCER<br />

4 Plenary Session, Sun, 1:00 PM-4:00 PM<br />

Intermittent (IAD) versus continuous androgen deprivation (CAD) in hormone<br />

sensitive metastatic prostate cancer (HSM1PC) patients (pts): Results of S9346<br />

(INT-0162), an international phase <strong>II</strong>I trial.<br />

Maha Hussain, Catherine M. Tangen, Celestia S. Higano, E. David Craw<strong>for</strong>d, Glenn Liu, George Wilding,<br />

Stephen Prescott, Atif Akdas, Eric Jay Small, Nancy Ann Dawson, Bryan J Donnelly, Peter Venner,<br />

Ulka N. Vaishampayan, Paul F. Schellhammer, David I. Quinn, Derek Raghavan, Nicholas J. Vogelzang,<br />

Ian Murchie Thompson; University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, MI; SWOG<br />

Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; University of<br />

Colorado Health Science Center, Aurora, CO; University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, Madison,<br />

WI; St. James University Hopsital, Leeds, United Kingdom; Marmara University, Istanbul, Turkey;<br />

University of Cali<strong>for</strong>nia, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA; Georgetown Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer<br />

Center, Washington, DC; Prostate Cancer Institute, Calgary, AB, Canada; Cross Cancer Institute,<br />

Edmonton, AB, Canada; Karmanos Cancer Institute, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI; Urology of<br />

Virginia, Norfolk, VA; University of Southern Cali<strong>for</strong>nia Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los<br />

Angeles, CA; Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC; US Oncology Research, LLC, McKesson Specialty<br />

Health, The Woodlands, TX, and Comprehensive Cancer Centers of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV; University of<br />

Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX<br />

Background: Castration resistance occurs in the vast majority of HSM1PC pts treated with AD, with a<br />

median survival of 2.5 years (y). It is in part an adaptive process with activation of genes resulting in the<br />

production of autocrine/paracrine growth factors that contribute to maintaining the viability of PC cells.<br />

Replacing androgens be<strong>for</strong>e castration resistance is hypothesized to maintain PC androgen-dependence.<br />

Preclinically IAD prolonged time to castration resistance and early clinical data indicated feasibility and<br />

potential <strong>for</strong> better quality of life. Methods: HSM1PC pts with per<strong>for</strong>mance status (PS) 0-2, PSA � 5 ng/ml<br />

were treated with 7 months (m) of goserelin � bicalutamide. Pts achieving PSA �4 ng/ml on m 6 and 7<br />

were stratified by prior neoadjuvant AD/finasteride, PS and disease extent (minimal, extensive) and<br />

randomized to CAD or IAD. Primary objective: To assess if overall survival (OS) with IAD is noninferior<br />

to CAD using a one-sided test with an upper bound hazard ratio�1.20, adjusting <strong>for</strong> stratification factors.<br />

Sample size: 756 pts/arm, type I and <strong>II</strong> error rates of 0.05 and 0.10. Results: 3,040 pts were accrued by<br />

SWOG, CALGB, ECOG, NCIC, and EORTC (5/95- 9/08). After 7 m of CAD, 1535 eligible pts achieved<br />

PSA �4.0 (median age 70 yrs, 4% PS 2, 48% extensive disease, 12% prior neoadjuvant AD) and were<br />

randomized to CAD (759 pts) or IAD (770 pts). Grade 3/4 related adverse events: IAD 30.3%, CAD 32.6%.<br />

Median follow-up was 9.2 yrs. Median and 10 yr OS: All eligible pts from study entry: 3.6 yrs, 17%; from<br />

randomization CAD: 5.8 yrs, 29%; IAD: 5.1 yrs, 23%, HR (IAD/CAD) � 1.09 (95% CI 0.95, 1.24). No<br />

interaction with therapy was significant (p�0.25) except suggestion with disease extent (p�0.08): extensive<br />

disease HR�0.96 (95% CI 0.79, 1.15, p�0.64); minimal disease: HR�1.23 (95% CI 1.02, 1.48, p�0.035).<br />

PC was cause of death in 56% of CAD and 64% IAD pts. OSby race was not different (p�0.44).<br />

Conclusions: In HSM1PC, IAD is not proven to be noninferior to CAD. For extensive disease pts IAD was<br />

noninferior; however, IAD was statistically inferior in minimal disease pts suggesting that CAD is the<br />

preferred treatment in this group.<br />

© 2012 American Society of Clinical Oncology. Reprinted with permission.


BREAST CANCER—HER2/ER<br />

LBA506 Oral Abstract Session, Sun, 8:00 AM-11:00 AM<br />

Evaluation of lapatinib as a component of neoadjuvant therapy <strong>for</strong> HER2� operable<br />

breast cancer: NSABP protocol B-41.<br />

Andre Robidoux, Gong Tang, Priya Rastogi, Charles E. Geyer, Catherine A. Azar, James Norman Atkins,<br />

Louis Fehrenbacher, Harry Douglas Bear, Luis Baez-Diaz, J. Phillip Kuebler, Richard G. Margolese,<br />

William Blair Farrar, Adam Brufsky, Henry R. Shibata, Hanna Bandos, Soonmyung Paik,<br />

Joseph P. Costantino, Sandra M. Swain, Eleftherios P. Mamounas, Norman Wolmark; National Surgical<br />

Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project and Centre Hospitalier de l’Universite de Montreal, Montreal, QC,<br />

Canada; NSABP Biostatistical Center and University of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public Health,<br />

Department of Biostatistics, Pittsburgh, PA; National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project and<br />

University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA; National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel<br />

Project and University of Texas, Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX; National Surgical Adjuvant<br />

Breast and Bowel Project and Kaiser Permanente, Denver, CO; National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and<br />

Bowel Project and SCCC-CCOP, Goldboro, NC; National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project and<br />

Kaiser Permanente Northern Cali<strong>for</strong>nia, Vallejo, CA; National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project<br />

and Virginia Commonwealth University, Masey Cancer Center, Richmond, VA; National Surgical Adjuvant<br />

Breast and Bowel Project and CCOP San Juan, San Juan, PR; National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and<br />

Bowel Project and CCOP Columbus, Columbus, OH; National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project<br />

and Segal Cancer Centre, Jewish General Hospital, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada; National<br />

Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project and Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital-Richard J. Solous<br />

Research Institute at Ohio State University, Columbus, OH; National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel<br />

Project and University of Pittsburgh, Magee-Womens Hospital, Pittsburgh, PA; National Surgical Adjuvant<br />

Breast and Bowel Project and McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada; NSABP<br />

Biostatistical Center, University of Pittsburgh, Graduate School of Public Health, Department of<br />

Biostatistics, Pittsburgh, PA; National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project, Pittsburgh, PA;<br />

National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Biostatistical Center and University of Pittsburgh<br />

Graduate School of Public Health, Department of Biostatistics, Pittsburgh, PA; National Surgical Adjuvant<br />

Breast and Bowel Project and Washington Cancer Institute, MedStar Washington Hospital Center,<br />

Washington, DC; National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project and Aultman Hospital, Canton,<br />

OH; National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project and Allegheny Cancer Center at Allegheny<br />

General Hospital, Pittsburgh, PA<br />

Background: The purposes of this trial are to determine the effect of substituting lapatinib (L) <strong>for</strong><br />

trastuzumab (T) in combination with weekly paclitaxel (WP) following AC as well as adding L to T with<br />

WP following AC on pathologic complete response (pCR) rates. Methods: Women with HER2-positive<br />

operable breast cancer received standard AC q3wks x 4 cycles followed by WP (80 mg/m 2 ) on days 1, 8,<br />

and 15 q28 days x 4 cycles. Concurrently with WP, patients received either T (4 mg/kg load, then 2 mg/kg)<br />

weekly until surgery, L (1250 mg) daily until surgery, or weekly T plus L (750 mg) daily until surgery.<br />

Following surgery, patients received trastuzumab to complete 52 wks of HER2-targeted therapy. The<br />

primary endpoint is pCR breast. For each of the two primary comparisons, the Fisher’s exact test was used<br />

to test the equality of pCR rates. A Hochberg-type step-up procedure was applied to address multiple<br />

testings and to control the family-wise error rate at 0.05. Results: 51% were clinically node positive and<br />

63% had HR� tumors. pCR assessments were available from 519 of 529 patients. pCR percentage was<br />

52.5% <strong>for</strong> AC¡WP�T, 53.2% (p�0.9) <strong>for</strong> AC¡WP�L, and 62% (p�0.075) <strong>for</strong> AC¡WP�TL. pCR<br />

percentages in the HR� subset were 46.7%, 48% (p�0.85), and 55.6% (p�0.18), respectively, and were<br />

65.5%, 60.6% (p�0.57), and 73% (p�0.37) in the HR- cohort. The corresponding pCR breast and nodes<br />

percentages were 49.1%, 47.4% (p�0.74), and 60.4% (p�0.04). Grade 3/4 toxicities include diarrhea in 2%,<br />

20%, 27% (p�0.001), and symptomatic Gr 3/4 left ventricular systolic dysfunction in 4%, 4%, and 2%<br />

(p�0.49). Conclusions: Substitution of lapatinib <strong>for</strong> trastuzumab in combination with the chemotherapy<br />

program employed in this study resulted in similar high percentages of pCR in both HR� and HR- cohorts.<br />

Combined HER2-targeted therapy produced a numerically higher pCR percentage than single agent<br />

HER2-directed therapy, but the difference was not statistically significant. Central review of HER2 and ER<br />

is being conducted to determine if subsets benefiting from the combined HER2-targeted therapy can be<br />

identified. Funding: GlaxoSmithKline.<br />

© 2012 American Society of Clinical Oncology. Reprinted with permission.


BREAST CANCER—HER2/ER<br />

LBA671 Oral Abstract Session, Sun, 8:00 AM-11:00 AM<br />

Open-label phase <strong>II</strong>I randomized controlled trial comparing taxane-based chemotherapy<br />

(Tax) with lapatinib (L) or trastuzumab (T) as first-line therapy <strong>for</strong> women<br />

with HER2� metastatic breast cancer: Interim analysis (IA) of NCIC CTG<br />

MA.31/GSK EGF 108919.<br />

Karen A. Gelmon, Frances Boyle, Bella Kaufman, David Huntsman, Alexey Manikhas, Angelo Di Leo,<br />

Miguel Martin, Lee Steven Schwartzberg, Susan Faye Dent, Susan Ellard, Katia Sonia Tonkin,<br />

Yasir M. Nagarwala, Kathleen I. Pritchard, Timothy Joseph Whelan, Dora Nomikos,<br />

Judy-Anne W. Chapman, Wendy Parulekar; British Columbia Cancer Agency-Vancouver Cancer Centre,<br />

Vancouver, BC, Canada; Mater Hospital, North Sydney, Australia; Chaim Sheba Medical Center, Tel<br />

Hashomer, Israel; British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, BC, Canada; City Clinical Oncological<br />

Dispensary, St. Petersburg, Russia; Sandro Pitigliani Medical Oncology Unit, Prato, Italy; Hospital<br />

Universitario Gregorio Maranon, Madrid, Spain; The West Clinic, Memphis, TN; The Ottawa Hospital<br />

Cancer Centre, Ottawa, ON, Canada; Cancer Centre <strong>for</strong> Southern Interior, Kelowna, BC, Canada; Cross<br />

Cancer Institute, Edmonton, AB, Canada; GlaxoSmithKline Oncology, Collegeville, PA; Sunnybrook Odette<br />

Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; Juravinski Cancer Centre at Hamilton Health<br />

Sciences, Hamilton, ON, Canada; NCIC Clinical Trials Group, Kingston, ON, Canada; NCIC Clinical<br />

Trials Group, Queen’s University, Kingston, ON, Canada<br />

Background: The relative efficacy of L vs T when combined with Tax chemotherapy in the first-line setting<br />

of metastatic breast cancer (BC) is unknown. Methods: MA.31 compares Tax-based therapy, paclitaxel<br />

80mg/m 2 wkly or docetaxel 75mg/m 2 3 wkly <strong>for</strong> 24 wks in combination with L or T. The L dose was 1,250<br />

mg po daily with Tax followed by 1,500 mg daily (LTax/L). After a loading dose, the T dose was 2 mg/kg<br />

wkly or 6 mg/kg 3 wkly � Tax followed by T 6 mg/kg 3 wkly (TTax/T). Stratification was by prior<br />

neo/adjuvant HER2 therapy, prior neo/adjuvant Tax, planned Tax (paclitaxel vs docetaxel), and liver<br />

metastases. The primary endpoint is ITT progression-free survival (PFS), defined as time from randomization<br />

to objective progressive disease based on RECIST criteria or death from any cause. The protocolspecified<br />

IA was per<strong>for</strong>med after observing 333 PFS events; the trial was to stop if the 2-sided p-value from<br />

the stratified log-rank test was less than 0.03. The NCIC CTG’s independent DSMC reviewed IA results and<br />

recommended disclosure because the superiority boundary was crossed. A secondary analysis utilized<br />

central laboratory-confirmed HER2 � status. Results: Between July 17 2008 and Dec 1 2011, 652 pts were<br />

accrued. Data from 636 pts (525 HER2 centrally confirmed) were included in the IA with clinical cutoff date<br />

of Nov 7 2011 and database lock of Apr 13 2012. Median follow-up was 13.6 mos, 12.9 mos <strong>for</strong> LTax/L<br />

pts and 14.0 mos <strong>for</strong> TTax/T patients. In the ITT analysis, PFS was inferior with LTax/L compared to<br />

TTax/T hazard ratio (HR) �1.33; 95% CI 1.06-1.67; p�0.01. LTax/L had median PFS 8.8 mos (95% CI<br />

8.3-10.6) compared to TTax/T 11.4 mos (95% CI 10.8-13.7). PFS in the centrally confirmed HER2� had<br />

HR 1.48 (95%CI 1.15-1.92; p�0.003) (LTax/L to TTax/T). No difference in overall survival was detected<br />

(LTax/L to TTax/T) HR� 1.1 (95% CI 0.75-1.61; p�0.62). More grade 3-4 diarrhea and rash was observed<br />

with LTax/L (p�0.001). Conclusions: LTax/L therapy is associated with a shorter PFS compared to TTax/T<br />

as first line therapy <strong>for</strong> HER2� metastatic BC. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00667251. CCSRI grant: 021039.<br />

Supported by GlaxoSmithKline.<br />

© 2012 American Society of Clinical Oncology. Reprinted with permission.


GASTROINTESTINAL (COLORECTAL) CANCER<br />

LBA3500^ Oral Abstract Session, Sun, 9:45 AM-12:45 PM<br />

Bevacizumab (Bev) with or without erlotinib as maintenance therapy, following<br />

induction first-line chemotherapy plus Bev, in patients (pts) with metastatic colorectal<br />

cancer (mCRC): Efficacy and safety results of the International GERCOR<br />

DREAM phase <strong>II</strong>I trial.<br />

Christophe Tournigand, Benoit Samson, Werner Scheithauer, Gérard Lledo, Frédéric Viret, Thierry Andre,<br />

Jean François Ramée, Nicole Tubiana-Mathieu, Jérôme Dauba, Olivier Dupuis, Yves Rinaldi, May Mabro,<br />

Nathalie Aucoin, Ahmed Khalil, Jean Latreille, Christophe Louvet, David Brusquant, Franck Bonnetain,<br />

Benoist Chibaudel, Aimery De Gramont, GERCOR; Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Paris, France; Hopital<br />

Charles-LeMoyne, Quebec, QC, Canada; Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Hôpital Privé<br />

Jean Mermoz, Lyon, France; Institut Paoli Calmettes, Marseille, France; Pitie-Salpetriere Hospital, Paris,<br />

France; Centre Catherine de Sienne, Nantes, France; CHU de Limoges, Limoges, France; Centre<br />

Hospitalier Layné, Mont de Marsan, France; Clinique Victor Hugo, Le Mans, France; Hôpital Ambroise<br />

Paré, Marseille, France; Hôpital Foch, Suresnes, France; Cite De La Sante De Laval, Laval, QC, Canada;<br />

Hôpital Tenon, Paris, France; CICM/Charles LeMoyne Hospital, Longueuil, QC, Canada; Institut<br />

Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris, France; GERCOR, Paris, France; Centre Georges François Leclerc, Dijon,<br />

France; Hospital Saint Antoine, Paris, France<br />

Background: Therapy targeting VEGF or EGFR demonstrated clinical activity in combination with<br />

chemotherapy (CT) in mCRC but monoclonal antibodies cannot be associated. The DREAM trial compares<br />

a maintenance therapy (MT) with bev �/- EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor erlotinib (E) after a first-line<br />

Bev-based induction therapy (IT) in pts with mCRC. Methods: Pts with previously untreated and<br />

unresectable mCRC were eligible. After a Bev-based IT with FOLFOX or XELOX or FOLFIRI, pts without<br />

disease progression were randomized to MT between Bev alone (Bev 7.5 mg/kg q3w; arm A) or Bev�E (B<br />

7.5 mg/kg q3w, E 150 mg/day continuously; arm B). Pts were treated until progression or unacceptable<br />

toxicity. The primary endpoint was PFS on MT. Results: The study enrolled 700 pts from 01/2007 to<br />

11/2011 in 3 countries (France, Canada, Austria). 446 (63.7%) pts were randomized <strong>for</strong> MT (arm A,<br />

N�224; arm B, N�222). Among the 446 randomized pts, IT regimen was FOLFOX-Bev in 265 pts<br />

(59.4%), XELOX-Bev in 135 pts (30.3%), and FOLFIRI-Bev in 46 pts (10.3%). Baseline characteristics of<br />

randomized pts were (arm A/B): ECOG PS 0, 60% in both arms; normal LDH level 47%/49%; normal<br />

alkaline phosphatase level 48%/50%; synchronous metastasis 83%/82%. The median no of MT cycles was<br />

6 in both arms. With a median follow-up of 31.0 months, 327 PFS events were observed. Median MT-PFS<br />

were 4.6 m in arm A vs 5.8 m in arm B (HR 0.73 [95%CI: 0.59-0.91], P�.005). Median PFS from inclusion<br />

were 9.2 m vs 10.2 m. During MT, in arm A vs arm B, grade 3-4 diarrhea (�1% vs 9%) and grade 3 skin<br />

toxicity (0% vs 19%) were the main differences in toxicity. Severe adverse events from randomization<br />

related to B or E were 6 in arm A and 7 in arm B. Overall survival is not mature. Conclusions: The addition<br />

of erlotinib to bevacizumab after induction therapy significantly improves the duration of maintenance PFS,<br />

following induction with first-line chemotherapy plus bevacizumab, in patients with unresectable metastatic<br />

colorectal cancer.<br />

© 2012 American Society of Clinical Oncology. Reprinted with permission.


GASTROINTESTINAL (COLORECTAL) CANCER<br />

LBA3501 Oral Abstract Session, Sun, 9:45 AM-12:45 PM<br />

Results of the X-PECT study: A phase <strong>II</strong>I randomized double-blind, placebocontrolled<br />

study of perifosine plus capecitabine (P-CAP) versus placebo plus<br />

capecitabine (CAP) in patients (pts) with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer<br />

(mCRC).<br />

Johanna C. Bendell, Thomas J. Ervin, Neil N. Senzer, Donald A. Richards, Irfan Firdaus,<br />

A. Craig Lockhart, Allen Lee Cohn, Mansoor N. Saleh, Lesa R. Gardner, Peter Sportelli, Cathy Eng; Sarah<br />

Cannon Research Institute/Tennessee Oncology, Nashville, TN; Sarah Cannon Research Institute/Florida<br />

Cancer Specialists, Englewood, FL; Mary Crowley Cancer Research Center, Dallas, TX; Texas Oncology-<br />

Tyler, Tyler, TX; Sarah Cannon Research Institute/Oncology Hematology Care, Inc, Cincinnati, OH;<br />

Washington University School of Medicine , St. Louis, MO; Rocky Mountain Cancer Center, LLP, Denver,<br />

CO; Georgia Cancer Specialists PC, Sandy Springs, GA; Keryx Biopharmaceuticals, Inc., New York, NY;<br />

University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX<br />

Background: Perifosine (P) is an oral, synthetic alkylphospholipid that inhibits or modifies signal<br />

transduction pathways including AKT, NFkB and JNK. A randomized phase <strong>II</strong> study examined P-CAP vs.<br />

CAP in pts with 2nd or 3rd line mCRC. This study showed improvement in mTTP (HR 0.254 [0.117, 0.555])<br />

and mOS (HR 0.370 [0.180,0.763]). Based on these results, a randomized phase <strong>II</strong>I study of P-CAP vs. CAP<br />

with a primary endpoint of overall survival (OS) in pts with refractory mCRC was initiated. Methods: The<br />

study was a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized phase <strong>II</strong>I trial. Eligible<br />

pts had mCRC which was refractory to all standard therapies. Pts randomized 1:1 to Arm A � P-CAP (P<br />

50 mg PO QD � CAP 1000 mg/m 2 PO BID d1-14) or Arm B � CAP (placebo � CAP 1000 mg/m2 PO<br />

BID d 1-14). Cycles were 21 days. Baseline tumor block collection and a biomarker cohort of pts with preand<br />

on-treatment tumor and blood samples were per<strong>for</strong>med. Results: Between 3/31/10 and 8/12/11, 468 pts<br />

were randomized, 234 pts were in each arm. Baseline demographics were balanced between the arms: age<br />

� 65y (A: 65%, B: 58.5%), male (A: 57.7%, B: 53.0%), ECOG PS 0 (A: 39.7%, B: 39.7%), K-ras mutant<br />

(A: 50.4%, B: 51.3%), and median number of prior therapies (A: 4, B: 4). As of 3/19/12, median follow up<br />

was 6.6 months. Median overall survival: Arm A � 6.4 mo, Arm B � 6.8 mo, HR 1.111 [0.905,1.365], p<br />

� 0.315. Median overall survival <strong>for</strong> K-ras WT pts: Arm A � 6.6 mo, Arm B � 6.8 mo, HR 1.020<br />

[0.763,1.365], p � 0.894; K-ras mutant pts: Arm A � 5.4 mo, Arm B � 6.9 mo HR 1.192 [0.890,1.596],<br />

p � 0.238. Conclusions: Despite promising randomized phase <strong>II</strong> data, this phase <strong>II</strong>I study shows no benefit<br />

in overall survival adding perifosine to capecitabine in the refractory colorectal cancer setting. Response<br />

rate, progression free survival, and safety data will be presented. Biomarker analysis is pending to see if<br />

subgroups of patients may have potential benefit.<br />

© 2012 American Society of Clinical Oncology. Reprinted with permission.


GASTROINTESTINAL (COLORECTAL) CANCER<br />

CRA3503 Oral Abstract Session, Sun, 9:45 AM-12:45 PM<br />

Bevacizumab (BEV) plus chemotherapy (CT) continued beyond first progression in<br />

patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) previously treated with BEV plus<br />

CT: Results of a randomized phase <strong>II</strong>I intergroup study (TML study).<br />

Dirk Arnold, Thierry Andre, Jaafar Bennouna, Javier Sastre, Pia J. Osterlund, Richard Greil,<br />

Eric Van Cutsem, Roger Von Moos, Irmarie Reyes-Rivera, Belguendouz Bendahmane, Stefan Kubicka;<br />

Hubertus Wald Tumor Center, University Cancer Center Hamburg (UCCH), Hamburg, Germany; Hopital<br />

Saint-Antoine, Paris, France; Institut de Cancerologie de l’Ouest/Site René Gauducheau, Nantes, France;<br />

Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain; Helsinki University Central Hospital, Helsinki, Finland; <strong>II</strong>Ird<br />

Medical Department with Hematology, Medical Oncology, Paracelsus Medical University Hospital<br />

Salzburg and AGMT (Arbeitsgemeinschaft Medikamentöse Tumortherapie), Salzburg, Austria; University<br />

Hospital Gasthuisberg, Leuven, Belgium; Kantonsspital Graubuenden, Graubuenden, Switzerland; Genentech,<br />

South San Francisco, CA; Roche, Basel, Switzerland; District Clinic Reutlingen, Department of<br />

Internal Medicine I, Reutlingen, Germany<br />

Background: BEV in combination with fluoropyrimidine-based CT is standard treatment <strong>for</strong> mCRC in the<br />

first-line (1L) and BEV-naïve second-line (2L) settings. This is the first randomized study evaluating the<br />

benefit of continuing BEV in combination with standard CT as 2L treatment <strong>for</strong> patients with mCRC who<br />

progressed after receiving a standard BEV-containing regimen in the 1L setting. Methods: Patients with<br />

unresectable, histologically confirmed mCRC who progressed within 3 months after discontinuation of 1L<br />

BEV � CT were randomised to 2L fluoropyrimidine-based CT � BEV (2.5 mg/kg/wk equivalent). Choice<br />

of oxaliplatin- or irinotecan-based 2L CT was dependent on the regimen used in 1L (crossover) and included<br />

as a stratification variable. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS); secondary endpoints included<br />

progression-free survival (PFS), response rate and safety. Results: 820 patients were randomized from<br />

February 2006 to June 2010 (409 to BEV � CT and 411 to CT alone). Baseline patient and disease<br />

characteristics were well balanced between arms. The study met its primary endpoint; median OS was 11.2<br />

months <strong>for</strong> BEV � CT and 9.8 months <strong>for</strong> CT (HR�0.81; 95% CI 0.69–0.94; unstratified log-rank test,<br />

p�0.0062). Median PFS was 5.7 months <strong>for</strong> BEV � CT and 4.1 months <strong>for</strong> CT (HR�0.68; 95% CI<br />

0.59–0.78; unstratified log-rank test, p�0.0001). The response rate was 5.4% <strong>for</strong> BEV � CT and 3.9% <strong>for</strong><br />

CT (unstratified Chi-Square Test, p�0.3113). The adverse event profile was consistent with previously<br />

reported data <strong>for</strong> BEV � CT. Compared with historical data from BEV treatment in 1L or 2L mCRC,<br />

BEV-related adverse events were not increased when continuing BEV beyond progression. Conclusions:<br />

This is the first randomized study to prospectively investigate the impact of continuing BEV treatment in<br />

2L mCRC <strong>for</strong> patients who progressed after receiving a BEV-containing regimen in 1L. Our findings<br />

demonstrate that BEV � CT (crossed over from 1L regimen) continued beyond progression significantly<br />

prolongs OS and PFS in 2L mCRC. Additional analysis (including biomarker evaluation) is ongoing.<br />

© 2012 American Society of Clinical Oncology. Reprinted with permission.


CRA6009 Clinical Science Symposium, Sun, 8:00 AM-9:30 AM<br />

Patterns of decision making about cancer clinical trial participation among the<br />

online cancer treatment community: A collaboration between SWOG and NexCura.<br />

Joseph M Unger, Dawn L. Hershman, Kenda Burg, Carol Moinpour, Kathy S. Albain, Judith A. Petersen,<br />

John Crowley; SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY;<br />

Nexcura, Seattle, WA; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Loyola University Medical<br />

Center, Maywood, IL; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA<br />

Background: Studies have shown an association between socioeconomic status (SES) and quality of<br />

oncology care, but less is known about the impact of SES on decision-making about CT participation.<br />

Methods: We assessed patterns of CT treatment decision-making according to important SES and<br />

demographic factors (age, sex, race, income, education) in a large sample of patients surveyed via a<br />

web-based treatment decision tool (NexCura, The Woodlands, TX). Eligible patients had a new diagnosis<br />

of breast, lung, colorectal, or prostate cancer, and were �18. Logistic regression (conditioning on type of<br />

cancer) was used. Reasons <strong>for</strong> non-participation in CTs were assessed using pre-specified items about<br />

treatment, family, cost, and logistics. All data were self-reported. Results: 5,499 patients were surveyed<br />

from 2007-2011. 40% discussed CTs with their physician; this differed by age (42% �65 v. 29% �65),<br />

income (42% �$50k/yr v. 36% �$50k/yr), and education (42% �college degree (CD) v. 37% �CD). 45%<br />

of discussions led to offers of CT participation, and 51% of offers led to CT participation. The overall CT<br />

participation rate was 9%, differing by age, income, and education (see table below). In a multivariate model<br />

including all SES and demographic factors (plus covariates comorbidity status and “distance to clinic”, a<br />

surrogate <strong>for</strong> convenience), income remained a predictor of CT participation (OR 0.73, 95% CI, 0.57-0.94,<br />

p�.01). Even in patients �65, who are nearly universally covered by Medicare, lower income predicted<br />

reduced CT participation (age by income interaction test, p�.05). Cost concerns were much more evident<br />

among lower income patients (p�.0001). Conclusions: Lower income patients were less likely to<br />

participate in CTs, even when considering age group.A better understanding of why income is a barrier may<br />

help identify ways to make CTs better available to all patients, and would increase the generalizability of<br />

CT study results across all levels of SES.<br />

Factor Category (code) % Enrolled in CT<br />

Age �65 (0)<br />

�65 (1)<br />

Income �$50k (0)<br />

�$50k (1)<br />

Education �CD (0)<br />

�CD (1)<br />

10.0<br />

5.4<br />

10.0<br />

7.6<br />

9.6<br />

7.9<br />

HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH<br />

Odds ratio (OR)<br />

95% CI p value<br />

0.64<br />

0.48-0.85<br />

0.68<br />

0.54-0.86<br />

0.78<br />

0.64-0.96<br />

© 2012 American Society of Clinical Oncology. Reprinted with permission.<br />

.002<br />

.001<br />

.02

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!