Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (13)
Language
- English (13)
Has Fulltext
- yes (13)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (13)
Keywords
- Gastric cancer (3)
- Immunohistochemistry (2)
- Cancer chemotherapy (1)
- Cancer treatment (1)
- Capecitabine (1)
- Chemorefractory advanced gastric cancer (1)
- Digestive system procedures (1)
- EGFR (1)
- EGFR inhibitor (1)
- Esophagogastric (1)
Institute
- Medizin (13)
- Georg-Speyer-Haus (2)
Background: There currently are no internationally recognised treatment guidelines for patients with advanced gastric cancer/gastro-oesophageal junction cancer (GC/GEJC) in whom two prior lines of therapy have failed. The randomised, phase III JAVELIN Gastric 300 trial compared avelumab versus physician’s choice of chemotherapy as third-line therapy in patients with advanced GC/GEJC.
Patients and methods: Patients with unresectable, recurrent, locally advanced, or metastatic GC/GEJC were recruited at 147 sites globally. All patients were randomised to receive either avelumab 10 mg/kg by intravenous infusion every 2 weeks or physician’s choice of chemotherapy (paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 or irinotecan 150 mg/m2 on days 1 and 15, each of a 4-week treatment cycle); patients ineligible for chemotherapy received best supportive care. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and safety.
Results: A total of 371 patients were randomised. The trial did not meet its primary end point of improving OS {median, 4.6 versus 5.0 months; hazard ratio (HR)=1.1 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.9–1.4]; P= 0.81} or the secondary end points of PFS [median, 1.4 versus 2.7 months; HR=1.73 (95% CI 1.4–2.2); P> 0.99] or ORR (2.2% versus 4.3%) in the avelumab versus chemotherapy arms, respectively. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) of any grade occurred in 90 patients (48.9%) and 131 patients (74.0%) in the avelumab and chemotherapy arms, respectively. Grade ≥3 TRAEs occurred in 17 patients (9.2%) in the avelumab arm and in 56 patients (31.6%) in the chemotherapy arm.
Conclusions: Treatment of patients with GC/GEJC with single-agent avelumab in the third-line setting did not result in an improvement in OS or PFS compared with chemotherapy. Avelumab showed a more manageable safety profile than chemotherapy.
Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02625623.
Background: HER2 status assessment is a prerequisite for the establishment of an appropriate treatment strategy in gastric cancer. Gastric cancers are very heterogeneous and separate evaluations of gene amplification and protein expression lead to uncertainties in localizing distinct clones and are time consuming. This study evaluates the equivalence of the novel method combining both gene and protein platforms on one slide.
Methods: Immunohistochemistry (IHC) and HER2 dual-colour silver in situ hybridization (SISH) as single methods (IHC/SISH) and gene-protein platform combining both methods on one slide (gene/protein) were performed in randomly collected 100 cases of gastric adenocarcinoma. Results of IHC/SISH were compared with gene/protein staining.
Results: 96 of 100 samples were assessable. In the gene/protein staining, pathologists were able to assess gene amplification and consequent protein expression at the single cell level. In comparison trials, gene amplification was observed in 14.6% by both, conventional SISH and gene/protein platform (agreement 100%; Kappa-coefficient κ = 1.0). Protein expression scores by IHC were 70.8% (0), 10.4% (1+), 9.4% (2+), and 9.4% (3+). Protein expression by gene/protein method were: 70.8% (0), 11.5% (1+), 7.3% (2+) and 10.4% (3+) of patients. There were complete concordances in IHC assessment of cases with score 0 (100.0%; κ = 1). High concordances are shown in score 1+ (98.96%; κ = 0.947) and 3+ (96.88%; κ = 0.825) cases and good concordances in 2+ cases (95.83%; κ = 0.728).
Conclusions: This novel combined platform has the advantage of being able to evaluate both gene and the protein status in the same cancer cell and may be of particular interest for research and patient's care.
New histone deacetylase inhibitors as potential therapeutic tools for advanced prostate carcinoma
(2008)
The anti-epileptic drug valproic acid is also under trial as an anti-cancer agent due to its histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitory properties. However, the effects of valproic acid (VPA) are limited and concentrations required for exerting anti-neoplastic effects in vitro may not be reached in tumour patients. In this study, we tested in vitro and in vivo effects of two VPA-derivatives (ACS2, ACS33) on pre-clinical prostate cancer models. PC3 and DU-145 prostate tumour cell lines were treated with various concentrations of ACS2 or ACS33 to perform in vitro cell proliferation 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide (MTT) assays and to evaluate tumour cell adhesion to endothelial cell monolayers. Analysis of acetylated histones H3 and H4 protein expression was performed by western blotting. In vivo tumour growth was conducted in subcutaneous xenograft mouse models. Tumour sections were assessed by immunohistochemistry for histone H3 acetylation and proliferation. ACS2 and ACS33 significantly up-regulated histone H3 and H4 acetylation in prostate cancer cell lines. In micromolar concentrations both compounds exerted growth arrest in PC3 and DU-145 cells and prevented tumour cell attachment to endothelium. In vivo, ACS33 inhibited the growth of PC3 in subcutaneous xenografts. Immunohistochemistry and western blotting confirmed increased histone H3 acetylation and reduced proliferation. ACS2 and ACS33 represent novel VPA derivatives with superior anti-tumoural activities, compared to the mother compound. This investigation lends support to the clinical testing of ACS2 or ACS33 for the treatment of prostate cancer.
Purpose: The PELICAN trial evaluates for the first time efficacy and safety of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) versus capecitabine as first-line treatment of metastatic breast cancer (MBC).
Methods: This randomized, phase III, open-label, multicenter trial enrolled first-line MBC patients who were ineligible for endocrine or trastuzumab therapy. Cumulative adjuvant anthracyclines of 360 mg/m2 doxorubicin or equivalent were allowed. Left ventricular ejection fraction of >50 % was required. Patients received PLD 50 mg/m2 every 28 days or capecitabine 1250 mg/m2 twice daily for 14 days every 21 days. The primary endpoint was time-to-disease progression (TTP).
Results: 210 patients were randomized (n = 105, PLD and n = 105, capecitabine). Adjuvant anthracyclines were given to 37 % (PLD) and 36 % (capecitabine) of patients. No significant difference was observed in TTP [HR = 1.21 (95 % confidence interval, 0.838–1.750)]. Median TTP was 6.0 months for both PLD and capecitabine. Comparing patients with or without prior anthracyclines, no significant difference in TTP was observed in the PLD arm (log-rank P = 0.64). For PLD versus capecitabine, respectively, overall survival (median, 23.3 months vs. 26.8 months) and time-to-treatment failure (median, 4.6 months vs. 3.7 months) were not statistically significantly different. Compared to PLD, patients on capecitabine experienced more serious adverse events (P = 0.015) and more cardiac events among patients who had prior anthracycline exposure (18 vs. 8 %; P = 0.31).
Conclusion: Both PLD and capecitabine are effective first-line agents for MBC.
Background: Peritoneal metastasis is a common and dismal evolution of several gastrointestinal (GI) tumors, including gastric, colorectal, hepatobiliary, pancreatic, and other cancers. The therapy of peritoneal metastasis is largely palliative; with the aim of prolonging life and preserving its quality. In the meantime, a significant pharmacological advantage of intraperitoneal chemotherapy was documented in the preclinical model, and numerous clinical studies have delivered promising clinical results.
Methods: This is a prospective, open, randomized multicenter phase III clinical study with two arms that aims to evaluate the effects of pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) combined with systemic chemotherapy vs. intravenous systemic chemotherapy alone on patients with metastatic upper GI tumors with a peritoneal seeding. Upper GI-adenocarcinomas originated from biliary tract, pancreas and stomach, or esophago- gastric junction are eligible. Patients in the study are treated with standard of care systemic palliative chemotherapy (mFOLFOX6) vs. PIPAC with intravenous (i.v.) chemotherapy (mFOLFOX6). Patients in first line with first diagnosed peritoneal seeding are eligible. Primary outcome is progression free survival (PFS).
Conclusions: PIPAC-procedure is explicit a palliative method but it delivers cytotoxic therapy like in hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC)-procedure directly to the tumor in a minimally invasive technique, without the need for consideration of the peritoneal-plasma barrier. The technique of PIPAC is minimally invasive and very gentle and the complete procedure takes only round about 45 min and, therefore, optimal in a clearly palliative situation where cure is not the goal. It is also ideal for using this approach in a first line situation, where deepest response should be achieved. The symbiosis of systemic therapy and potentially effective surgery has to be well-planned without deterioration of the patient due to aggressive way of surgery like in cytoreductive surgery (CRS)+HIPEC.
Trial registration: EudraCT: 2018-001035-40.
The prognostic impact of epidermal growth factor receptor in patients with metastatic gastric cancer
(2012)
Background: The epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) is a potential target of anticancer therapy in gastric cancer. However, its prognostic role in metastatic gastric or gastroesophageal junction (GE) cancer has not been established yet.
Methods: EGFR status was analyzed by immunohistochemistry (IHC) in paraffin-embedded samples from 357 patients who received chemotherapy in 4 first-line trials. Automated RNA extraction from paraffin and RT-quantitative PCR were additionally used to evaluate EGFR mRNA expression in 130 patients.
Results: EGFR protein expression (any grade) and overexpression (3+) were observed in 43% and 11% of patients, respectively. EGFR positivity correlated with intestinal type histology (p = 0.05), but not with other clinicopathologic characteristics. Median follow-up was 18.2 months. Median overall survival (OS) was similar in patients with EGFR positive vs. those with EGFR negative tumors, regardless whether positivity was defined as ≥1+ (10.6 vs. 10.9 months, p = 0.463) or as 3+ (8.6 vs. 10.8 months, p = 0.377). The multivariate analysis indicated that EGFR status is not an independent prognostic factor (hazard ratio 0.85, 0.56 to 1.12, p = 0.247). There were also no significant differences in overall survival when patients were categorized according to median (p = 0.116) or quartile (p = 0.767) distribution of EGFR mRNA gene expression. Similar distributions of progression-free survival according to EGFR status were observed.
Conclusions: Unlike different cancer types where EGFR-positive disease is associated with an adverse prognostic value, EGFR positivity is not prognostic of patient outcome in metastatic gastric or GE cancer.
This study aimed at determining the recommended dose of the mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor everolimus in combination with mitomycin C (MMC) in patients with previously treated metastatic esophagogastric cancer. In this phase I trial, patients received escalated doses of oral everolimus (5, 7.5, and 10 mg/day) in combination with intravenous MMC 5 mg/m2 every 3 weeks. Endpoints were the dose-limiting toxicity (DLT), safety, and response rates. Tumor tissues were tested for HER2-status and mutations in the PTEN, PIK3CA, AKT1, CTNNB1, and E-cadherin type 1 genes. Sixteen patients (12 male, four female) with gastric/gastroesophageal junction cancer were included. All patients were previously treated with a platinum-based chemotherapy. Treatment cohorts were: 5 mg/day, three patients; 7.5 mg/day, three patients; and 10 mg/day, 10 patients. No DLTs occurred during dose escalation. Most frequent grade 3 toxicities were leukopenia (18.8%) and neutropenia (18.8%). All other grade 3 toxicities were below 10%. No grade 4 toxicities occurred. Three (18.8%) patients experienced partial responses and four patients had stable disease (SD). Antitumor activity according to Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST)-criteria was highest in the 10 mg/day cohort. No associations between HER2-status or detected mutations and response were observed. The recommended dose of everolimus combined with MMC is 10 mg/day. Encouraging signs of antitumor activity were seen (http://www.ClinicalTrials.gov; Clinical trial registration number: NCT01042782).
Introduction: ScFv(FRP5)-ETA is a recombinant antibody toxin with binding specificity for ErbB2 (HER2). It consists of an N-terminal single-chain antibody fragment (scFv), genetically linked to truncated Pseudomonas exotoxin A (ETA). Potent antitumoral activity of scFv(FRP5)-ETA against ErbB2-overexpressing tumor cells was previously demonstrated in vitro and in animal models. Here we report the first systemic application of scFv(FRP5)-ETA in human cancer patients.
Methods: We have performed a phase I dose-finding study, with the objective to assess the maximum tolerated dose and the dose-limiting toxicity of intravenously injected scFv(FRP5)-ETA. Eighteen patients suffering from ErbB2-expressing metastatic breast cancers, prostate cancers, head and neck cancer, non small cell lung cancer, or transitional cell carcinoma were treated. Dose levels of 2, 4, 10, 12.5, and 20 μg/kg scFv(FRP5)-ETA were administered as five daily infusions each for two consecutive weeks.
Results: No hematologic, renal, and/or cardiovascular toxicities were noted in any of the patients treated. However, transient elevation of liver enzymes was observed, and considered dose limiting, in one of six patients at the maximum tolerated dose of 12.5 μg/kg, and in two of three patients at 20 μg/kg. Fifteen minutes after injection, peak concentrations of more than 100 ng/ml scFv(FRP5)-ETA were obtained at a dose of 10 μg/kg, indicating that predicted therapeutic levels of the recombinant protein can be applied without inducing toxic side effects. Induction of antibodies against scFv(FRP5)-ETA was observed 8 days after initiation of therapy in 13 patients investigated, but only in five of these patients could neutralizing activity be detected. Two patients showed stable disease and in three patients clinical signs of activity in terms of signs and symptoms were observed (all treated at doses ≥ 10 μg/kg). Disease progression occurred in 11 of the patients.
Conclusion: Our results demonstrate that systemic therapy with scFv(FRP5)-ETA can be safely administered up to a maximum tolerated dose of 12.5 μg/kg in patients with ErbB2-expressing tumors, justifying further clinical development.
Following publication of the data presented by von Minckwitz and colleagues it has been brought to our attention that some patients should be scored differently. Stable disease was seen in three of the eighteen patients instead of two of the eighteen patients: one patient with transitional cell carcinoma treated at 4 µg/kg scFv(FRP5)-ETA per day, and two breast cancer patients treated at 4 and 12.5 µg/kg scFv(FRP5)-ETA per day. Disease progression occured in 9 of the eighteen patients evaluated (see corrected Table 2 overleaf). This does not affect the conclusions of our study. In addition we would like to correct the following errors: patient IDs for patients U01 and U02 in the original Table 2 were interchanged. In addition, patient N03 had a grade 3 elevation of gamma-glutamyl transferase, and not grade 2 (see corrected Table 2 overleaf).
Background: As a multi-targeted anti-angiogenic receptor tyrosine kinase (RTK) inhibitor sunitinib (SUN) has been established for renal cancer and gastrointestinal stromal tumors. In advanced refractory esophagogastric cancer patients, monotherapy with SUN was associated with good tolerability but limited tumor response.
Methods: This double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter, phase II clinical trial was conducted to evaluate the efficacy, safety and tolerability of SUN as an adjunct to second and third-line FOLFIRI (NCT01020630). Patients were randomized to receive 6-week cycles including FOLFIRI plus sodium folinate (Na-FOLFIRI) once every two weeks and SUN or placebo (PL) continuously for four weeks followed by a 2-week rest period. The primary study endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Preplanned serum analyses of VEGF-A, VEGF-D, VEGFR2 and SDF-1α were performed retrospectively.
Results: Overall, 91 patients were randomized, 45 in each group (one patient withdrew). The main grade ≥3 AEs were neutropenia and leucopenia, observed in 56 %/20 % and 27 %/16 % for FOLFIRI + SUN/FOLFIRI + PL, respectively. Median PFS was similar, 3.5 vs. 3.3 months (hazard ratio (HR) 1.11, 95 % CI 0.70–1.74, P = 0.66) for FOLFIRI + SUN vs. FOLFIRI + PL, respectively. For FOLFIRI + SUN, a trend towards longer median overall survival (OS) compared with placebo was observed (10.4 vs. 8.9 months, HR 0.82, 95 % CI 0.50–1.34, one-sided P = 0.21). In subgroup serum analyses, significant changes in VEGF-A (P = 0.017), VEGFR2 (P = 0.012) and VEGF-D (P < 0.001) serum levels were observed.
Conclusions: Although sunitinib combined with FOLFIRI did not improve PFS and response in chemotherapy-resistant gastric cancer, a trend towards better OS was observed. Further biomarker-driven studies with other anti-angiogenic RTK inhibitors are warranted.
Trial registration: This study was registered prospectively in the NCT Clinical Trials Registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) under NCT01020630 on November 23, 2009 after approval by the leading ethics committee of the Medical Association of Rhineland-Palatinate, Mainz, in coordination with the participating ethics committees (see Additional file 2) on September 16, 2009.
