bluuebunny/crossref_metadata_2025_split huggingface dataset:
A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III trial comparing docetaxel, prednisone, and placebo with docetaxel, prednisone, and bevacizumab in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC): Survival results of CALGB 90401.
Authors: Kelly W. K. , Halabi S. , Carducci M. A. , George D. J. , Mahoney J. F. , Stadler W. M. , Morris M. J. , Kantoff P. W. , Monk J. P. , Small E. J. ,   Cancer and Leukemia Group B
Published: February 2017

LBA4511 Background: The preclinical activity of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) blockade, the inverse relationship of plasma and urine VEGF levels and survival in mCRPC patients (pts), and encouraging phase II data testing estramustine and docetaxel with bevacizumab suggested that VEGF blockade was an appropriate potential strategy in mCRPC. A phase III study testing the effect of adding bevacizumab to standard docetaxel and prednisone therapy administered every 3 weeks in pts with mCRPC was conducted. Methods: 1050 pts with chemotherapy naïve, mCRPC with evidence of progressive disease despite castrate testosterone levels and anti-androgen withdrawal, ECOG performance status ≤ 2, and adequate bone marrow, hepatic and renal function were eligible. Pts were prospectively randomized with equal probability to receive docetaxel (D:75 mg/m2 IV over 1 hour q 21 days), plus prednisone (P) 5 mg po BID with either bevacizumab (B:15 mg/kg given intravenously q 3 weeks following D) or placebo. All patients received dexamethasone 8 mg PO 12, 3 and 1 hour prior to D. Randomization was stratified by predicted 24 mo survival probability, age and history of prior arterial thrombotic event. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). The trial was designed with 86% power to detect a 21% decrease in the hazard rate of death (equivalent to an increase in median OS from 19 months to 24 months) assuming a two-sided significance level of 0.05. The primary analysis was based on the stratified log-rank statistic adjusted for the stratification factors following observation of 748 deaths. Results: See Table . Conclusions: Despite an improvement in PFS, measurable disease response and post-therapy PSA decline, the addition of bevacizumab to docetaxel and prednisone did not improve OS in men with mCRPC, and was associated with greater morbidity and mortality. The median OS of pts treated with standard DP (21.5 m) was longer than previously reported (19 m). [Table: see text] [Table: see text]
Primary outcome results of NSABP B-32, a randomized phase III clinical trial to compare sentinel node resection (SNR) to conventional axillary dissection (AD) in clinically node-negative breast cancer patients.
Authors: Krag D. N. , Anderson S. J. , Julian T. B. , Brown A. , Harlow S. P. , Costantino J. P. , Ashikaga T. , Weaver D. , Mamounas E. P. , Wolmark N. 
Published: February 2017

LBA505 Background: NSABP B-32 is the largest prospective randomized phase III trial designed to determine in SN negative patients that SNR alone results in the same survival and regional control as SNR + AD while reducing morbidity. It was designed to detect a survival difference of 2% between the 2 groups at 5 years. Methods: 5,611 women with operable, clinically N0, invasive breast cancer were randomized to SNR + AD (Group 1) or to SNR alone with AD only if SNs were positive (Group 2). 3,989 (71.1%) of the 5,611 patients were SN negative and followed for events. 99.9% of these SN negative patients had follow-up information: 1,975 in Group 1 and 2,011 in Group 2. Median time on study was 95.3 months. Patients were well balanced across clinical strata. Log-rank tests for unadjusted analyses and Cox proportional hazard models adjusting for study stratification variables were used to compare overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) between the two groups. Two-sided p-values were used. HR values > 1 indicate a more favorable outcome in Group 1 (SNR + AD). Results: Comparisons of OS (Group 1 vs. Group 2) yielded an unadjusted HR of 1.20 (p = 0.12) and an adjusted HR of 1.19 (p=0.13). Five-year Kaplan-Meier estimates for OS are 96.4% in Group 1 and 95.0% in Group 2 and the 8-year estimates are 91.8% and 90.3%, respectively. Comparisons of DFS (Group 1 vs. Group 2) yielded an unadjusted HR of 1.05 (p=0.54) and an adjusted HR of1.07 (p=0.57). No substantial differences could be seen across sites for first treatment failure. Five-year Kaplan-Meier estimates for DFS are 89.0% in Group 1, and 88.6% in Group 2 and the 8-year estimates are 82.4% and 81.5%, respectively. Local and Regional Recurrences: There were 54 local recurrences in Group 1 and 49 in Group 2 (p=0.55). There were 8 regional node recurrences as first events in Group 1 and 14 in Group 2 (p=0.22). Conclusions: No significant differences were observed in OS, DFS, or regional control between the trial groups. Within the limits of this trial, SNR without AD is validated as a safe and effective method for regional node treatment of SN negative breast cancer patients. [Table: see text]
ACOSOG Z1031: A randomized phase II trial comparing exemestane, letrozole, and anastrozole in postmenopausal women with clinical stage II/III estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer.
Authors: Ellis M. J. , Babiera G. , Unzeitig G. W. , Marcom P. K. , Guenther J. M. , Deshryver F. K. , Allred D. C. , Suman V. , Hunt K. , Olson J. A. 
Published: February 2017

LBA513 Background: Neoadjuvant aromatase inhibitor (AI) therapy is a rational and effective approach to improving the breast conservation surgery (BCS) rate for postmenopausal patients with large, estrogen receptor (ER) rich breast cancers. Barriers to adopting this strategy include lack of experience in this management approach in the US and uncertainty regarding the comparative effectiveness of the three approved aromatase inhibitors for this indication. Methods: ACOSOG Z1031 is a multicenter, open-label, neoadjuvant phase III screening study that randomized postmenopausal women with clinical stage II/III ER rich (Allred score 6-8) breast cancer to 16 weeks of either exemestane (EXE) 25 mg daily, letrozole (LET) 2.5 mg daily, or anastrozole (ANA) 1 mg daily. At baseline study participants were either marginal for BCS (MBCS), candidates for mastectomy only (MO), or inoperable (IO). Planned enrolment was 125 patients per arm in order that the likelihood of the treatment with the “best” 16-week clinical response rate (based on caliper measurements) by WHO criteria (cRR) was included among the subset of treatments with “similar” cRR (90% power). Secondary endpoints included: extent of surgery, radiologic and pathologic response rates. Results: From 4/1/2006 to 10/1/2009, 377 postmenopausal women with clinical stage II or III ER rich breast cancer were enrolled. 374 women began treatment and were included in an intent-to-treat analysis. Median age was 66 yrs (range: 43-90 yrs), Median tumor size was 4.0 cm (range: 2-13 cm). The 16-week cRR was 60.5% (95%CI: 51.3-69.1%) for EXE; 70.9% (95% CI: 62.2-78.6%) for LET, and 66.7% (95% CI: 57.6-74.9%) for ANA. Seventeen patients did not have surgery due to refusal (12 pts), progression (3 pts) or other medical conditions (2 pts). The BCS rate was 78% (163/207) in MBCS group; 42% (77/163) in MO group; and 75% in IO group (3/4). Surgeons made the decisions regarding procedure choice 75% of the time in both the MBCS and the MO categories. Conclusions: This large multicenter screening trial selected non-steroidal AIs for further development due to their higher observed cRR. The study demonstrates that high response and breast conservation rates and low rates of disease progression can be achieved through patient selection based on high ER expression. We are currently refining our approach for early detection of poor response to AIs through an assessment of the tumor Ki67 proliferation index at 2 to 4 weeks (Z1031 Cohort B). [Table: see text]
Results from ARQ 197-209: A global randomized placebo-controlled phase II clinical trial of erlotinib plus ARQ 197 versus erlotinib plus placebo in previously treated EGFR inhibitor-naive patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).
Authors: Schiller J. H. , Akerley W. L. , Brugger W. , Ferrari D. , Garmey E. G. , Gerber D. E. , Orlov S. V. , Ramlau R. , Von Pawel J. , Sequist L. V. 
Published: February 2017

LBA7502 Background: Orally administered ARQ197 is a selective, non-ATP competitive inhibitor of c-MET (MET), a receptor TK implicated in cancer cell migration, invasion, and proliferation. Dual EGFR-MET inhibition is a promising strategy for overcoming MET-mediated resistance to EGFR inhibitors. A prior phase I trial demonstrated the safety of ARQ197 plus erlotinib and suggested activity in patients (pts) with advanced NSCLC. Methods: This is a global, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial comparing erlotinib plus ARQ197 (E+A) versus erlotinib plus placebo (E+P). Archival tissue was collected for all pts for k-RAS, EGFR, and MET analyses. The primary endpoint was PFS; secondary endpoints included safety, ORR, OS, and subgroup analyses. Results: 167 pts were randomized to E+A (84 pts) or E+P (83 pts). Mean age was 63 yrs and baseline characteristics were well balanced for sex (39%/41% F); race (93%/96% white) and smoking history (20%/22% never smoker). Imbalances were seen among treatment arms in NSCLC histology (54%/64% adeno) and predictive molecular genotypes: EGFR mutations (7%/13%) and k-RAS mutations (12%/6%). Final PFS was prolonged with E+A (median = 16.1 wks) vs E+P (9.7 wks) among ITT pts (HR 0.81 [95% CI 0.57, 1.15]; p=0.23). Planned multivariable Cox regression model adjusting for prognostic factors (including histology, genotype) yielded PFS HR 0.68 (95% CI 0.47, 0.98; p<0.05). PFS improvement was particularly prominent among pts with nonsquamous histology, EGFR wild-type status, and k-RAS mutations. Preliminary safety analysis revealed no major differences between arms with AEs (≥10% of pts; all grades) including rash (64%/52%); diarrhea (48%/53%); fatigue (33%/37%); nausea (26%/26%); and anemia (14%/13%). OS, ORR, and final safety data will be analyzed at study conclusion. Conclusions: Combined with erlotinib in the treatment of second/third-line EGFR-inhibitor naïve NSCLC, ARQ-197 is well-tolerated and prolongs PFS. Particular benefit is observed among pts with non-squamous histology, k-RAS mutations, and EGFR wild-type status. [Table: see text]
Efficacy and safety of PF299804 versus erlotinib (E): A global, randomized phase II trial in patients (pts) with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after failure of chemotherapy (CT).
Authors: Boyer M. J. , Blackhall F. H. , Park K. , Barrios C. H. , Krzakowski M. J. , Taylor I. , Liang J. Q. , Denis L. J. , O'Connell J. P. , Ramalingam S. S. 
Published: February 2017

LBA7523 Background: PF299804, a potent, irreversible inhibitor of human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER)-1/EGFR, -2, and -4 tyrosine kinases (TK), is active in E-sensitive and -resistant preclinical models. PF299804 had clinical activity in phase I/II trials in EGFR TK inhibitor (TKI)-refractory NSCLC; a phase III trial is ongoing (BR26). The current trial compared efficacy and safety of PF299804 vs.E in pts with NSCLC after CT failure. Methods: Eligible pts (any histology, ECOG performance status [PS] 0–2, 1/2 CT regimen failures, no prior E, available tumor tissue) were randomized 1:1 to oral PF299804 45 mg or E 150 mg once daily and treated until progression/toxicity. Endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS; primary), overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), safety, and KRAS/EGFR mutation (mu) status. Results: 188 pts (median age 60 years, 87% PS 0/1, 41% female, 65% adenocarcinoma (adeno), 25% East Asian, 21% non-smoker, 16% EGFR mu, 16% KRAS mu) were randomized. Baseline characteristics were balanced between arms except for PS 2 ( PF299804 , 20; E, 3 pts). Mu status determination rates were high (KRAS, 81%; EGFR, 77%). Median follow-up was 12 weeks. PF299804 showed significantly longer PFS vs. E in the overall population (p=0.017), with benefit consistent across several subgroups (SG) including EGFR wild type (wt). ORR favored PF299804 (17% vs. 4%; p=0.008). Frequent treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) for PF299804 vs. E (grade, any/3 or 4): diarrhea (71%/11% v 48%/3%), acne (53%/7% vs. 34%/5%), and rash (26%/4% vs. 37%/2%). Eight pts discontinued due to TRAEs: PF299804 , 6; E, 2 pts. Conclusions: PF299804 showed significant improvement in PFS (primary endpoint) vs. E in all enrolled pts with NSCLC. Common EGFR TKI AEs were more frequent with PF299804. [Table: see text] [Table: see text]
Busulphan-melphalan as a myeloablative therapy (MAT) for high-risk neuroblastoma: Results from the HR-NBL1/SIOPEN trial.
Authors: Ladenstein R. L. , Poetschger U. , Luksch R. , Brock P. , Castel V. , Yaniv I. , Papadakis V. , Laureys G. , Malis J. , Balwierz W. , Ruud E. , Kogner P. , Schroeder H. , Forjaz De Lacerda A. , Beck Popovic M. , Bician P. , Garami M. , Trahair T. , Pearson A. D. , Valteau Couanet D. 
Published: February 2017

2 Background: The HR-NBL1 trial of the European SIOP Neuroblastoma Group randomised 2 MAT regimens with the primary aim to demonstrate superiority based on event free survival (EFS). Methods: At randomisation closure, 1,577 high-risk neuroblastoma patients (944 males) had been included since 2002; with INSS stage 4 disease (1,369 pts) > 1 year, infants (65 pts) and stage II and III (143 pts) of any age with MYCN amplification. Response eligibility criteria prior to randomisation after Rapid COJEC Induction (J Clin Oncol, 2010) ± 2 courses of TVD (Cancer, 2003) included complete bone marrow remission and ≤ 3, but improved, mIBG positive spots. The MAT regimens were BuMel (oral busulfan till 2006, 4x150mg/m2 in 4 equal doses, or after 2006 intravenous use according to body weight and melphalan 140mg/m2/day) and CEM (carboplatin ctn. infusion [4xAUC 4.1mg/ml.min/day], etoposide ctn. infusion [4x338mg/m2day or 4x200mg/m2/day*], melphalan [3x70mg/m2/day or 3x60mg/m2/day*. *reduced if GFR<100ml/min/1.73m2]). A minimum of 3x10E6 CD34/kgBW PBSC were requested. VOD prophylaxis included ursadiol, but not prophylactic defibrotide. Local control included surgery and radiotherapy of 21 Gy. A total of 598 patients were randomised (296 BuMel, 302 CEM). The median age at randomisation was 3 years (1-17.2) with a median follow up of 3 years. Results: At the last analysis, the Peto rule of p<0.001 was met. A significant difference in EFS in favour of BuMel (3-years EFS 49% vs 33%) was observed as well as for overall survival (3-years OS 60% vs 48%, p=0.004). This difference was mainly related to the relapse and progression incidence, which was significantly (p<0.001) lower with BuMel (48% vs 60%). The severe toxicity rate up to day 100 (ICU and toxic deaths) was below 10%, but was significantly higher for CEM (p=0.014). The acute toxic death rate was 3% for BuMel and 5% for CEM (NS). The acute MAT toxicity profile favours the BuMel regimen in spite of a total VOD incidence of 18% (grade 3:5%). Based on these results and following advice from the DMC, the randomisation was closed early. Conclusions: BuMel was demonstrated to be superior to CEM and hence is recommended as standard treatment.
Personalized medicine in a phase I clinical trials program: The M. D. Anderson Cancer Center Initiative.
Authors: Tsimberidou A. M. , Iskander N. G. , Hong D. S. , Wheler J. J. , Fu S. , Piha-Paul S. A. , Naing A. , Falchook G. S. , Janku F. , Luthra R. , Wen S. , Kurzrock R. 
Published: February 2017

CRA2500 Background: We initiated a personalized medicine program hypothesizing that tumor molecular analysis and use of targeted therapy to counteract the effects of specific aberrations would improve the outcomes of affected patients. Methods: Molecular analysis was performed in the M. D. Anderson CLIA-certified pathology laboratory. Patients whose tumors had an aberration were treated in the Phase I Program with a matched targeted agent, when available. Results: Tumor molecular analysis was feasible in 852 (89%) of 955 consecutive patients with advanced cancer. Of 852 patients (median, age 56 yrs; prior therapies 4), 354 (41.5%) had ≥ 1 aberration: 10% of patients had a PIK3CA mutation; 19% KRAS; 8% NRAS; 19% BRAF; 3% EGFR; and 2% had a CKIT mutation; 21% had PTEN loss. Results are shown in the table. Median time to treatment failure (TTF) in 161 patients with 1 aberration treated with matched targeted therapy was 5.3 months (95%CI: 4.1, 6.6) vs 3.2 months (95%CI: 2.9 – 4.0) for their prior systemic antitumor therapy (prior to referral to phase I) (p= .0003). For patients with 1 aberration, the CR+PR rate was 29% with matched targeted therapy vs. 8% without matching (p = .0001). The CR+PR rate was 6% in 438 patients without molecular testing treated on the same studies. Conclusions: Preliminary results suggest that in early clinical trials matching patients with targeted drugs based on their molecular profile results in (a) longer TTF compared to their prior therapy and (b) higher rates of response, survival and TTF compared to those seen in patients treated without molecular matching. Support: 3UL1 RR024148 04 S1 and IPCT. [Table: see text]
Twelve versus 36 months of adjuvant imatinib (IM) as treatment of operable GIST with a high risk of recurrence: Final results of a randomized trial (SSGXVIII/AIO).
Authors: Joensuu H. , Eriksson M. , Hatrmann J. , Sundby Hall K. , Schutte J. , Reichardt A. , Schlemmer M. , Wardelmann E. , Ramadori G. , Al-Batran S. , Nilsson B. E. , Monge O. , Kallio R. , Sarlomo-Rikala M. , Bono P. , Leinonen M. , Hohenberger P. , Alvegard T. , Reichardt P. 
Published: February 2017

LBA1 Background: Adjuvant IM administered for 12 months (mos) after surgery improves recurrence-free survival (RFS) of patients (pts) diagnosed with operable GIST. We compared 12 vs 36 mos of adjuvant IM as treatment of pts with a high risk for GIST recurrence after surgery. Methods: Pts with histologically diagnosed KIT-positive GIST were entered to this prospective, open-label, multicenter, randomized Phase III study (identifier NCT00116935 ). The risk of recurrence was estimated according to the modified Consensus Criteria. The primary objective was RFS. The secondary objectives included survival (OS) and treatment safety. The key exclusion criteria were ECOG PS >2, metastatic or inoperable GIST, and >12 wks from surgery to the study entry. IM was administered orally 400 mg/d. The sample size (n =200 in each group to obtain ≥110 events) was estimated by simulating log-rank tests assuming an overall hazard ratio (HR) of 0.44, a 20% drop-out rate, 2-sided type-I error rate of .05 and power 0.80. Analysis was based on the intention-to-treat population (ITT). Tumor histology was centrally reviewed. Results: 400 pts were entered to the study from Feb 2004 to Sep 2008. Three pts were excluded due to lack of consent from the ITT, which includes 15 pts who did not have GIST at a central review. The median FU time was 54 mos. RFS was longer in the 36-mo group compared to the 12-mo group (HR 0.46, 95% CI 0.32-0.65; p <.0001; 5-y RFS 65.6% vs 47.9%, respectively). Pts assigned to 36-mo of IM had longer OS (HR 0.45, 0.22-0.89; p =.019; 5-y OS 92.0% vs 81.7%). IM was generally well tolerated. The proportion of pts who discontinued IM during the assigned treatment period for reasons other than GIST recurrence was 25.8% in the 36-mo group and 12.6% in the 12-mo group. Exploratory efficacy subgroup analyses including KIT and PDGFRA mutation analysis data from 366 tumors will be presented. Conclusions: IM administered for 36 mos improves RFS and OS compared to 12 mos of administration as adjuvant treatment of GIST pts who have a high estimated risk of recurrence after surgery.
PALETTE: A randomized, double-blind, phase III trial of pazopanib versus placebo in patients (pts) with soft-tissue sarcoma (STS) whose disease has progressed during or following prior chemotherapy—An EORTC STBSG Global Network Study (EORTC 62072).
Authors: Van Der Graaf W. T. , Blay J. , Chawla S. P. , Kim D. , Bui Nguyen B. , Casali P. G. , Schöffski P. , Aglietta M. , Staddon A. P. , Beppu Y. , Le Cesne A. , Gelderblom H. , Judson I. R. , Araki N. , Ouali M. , Marreaud S. , Hodge R. , Dewji M. , Dei Tos A. P. , Hohenberger P. 
Published: February 2017

LBA10002 Background: Pazopanib, a multi targeted angiogenesis inhibitor, has demonstrated single-agent activity in pts with advanced STS. The efficacy and safety of pazopanib versus placebo as second or later line treatment were evaluated in pts with metastatic STS in a multi-center, international, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III trial. Methods: Pts ≥18 years of age with angiogenesis inhibitor-naïve, histologically proven, metastatic STS, who failed at least one anthracycline containing regimen, could enter the study. They should have ≥1 measurable baseline lesion (per RECIST v1.0), WHO PS 0-1, adequate bone marrow, coagulation, hepatic and renal function, no poorly controlled hypertension, no bleeding diathesis, and no CNS involvement. The study has been conducted by EORTC and GSK in collaboration with 72 sarcoma centers worldwide. Pts were randomized 2:1 to receive either pazopanib 800 mg once daily or placebo until tumor progression, unacceptable toxicity, death, or pt’s request. Results: A total of 369 randomized pts (246 pazopanib, 123 placebo), median age of 56 years, participated in the study (EORTC 45 %, other 55%). Median duration of follow-up at clinical cut-off date is 15 months. The primary endpoint of progression-free survival (PFS) per independent review is significantly prolonged with pazopanib (median: 20 vs 7 weeks; HR=0.31, 95% CI 0.24-0.40 ; P<0.0001). The interim analysis for overall survival shows a statistically non-significant improvement of pazopanib vs placebo (median: 11.9 vs 10.4 months, HR=0.83, 95% CI 0.62-1.09). Main on-therapy grade 3-4 toxicities in the pazopanib vs placebo arm respectively: fatigue (13%, 6%), hypertension (7%, nil), anorexia (6%, nil), and diarrhea (5%, 1%). Similarly, thromboembolic events (grade 3-5 ) (3%, 2%), LVEF drop of >15% (8%, 3%). Median relative dose intensity of pazopanib was 768 mg daily. Conclusions: Pazopanib is an active drug in anthracycline pretreated metastatic STS pts with an increase in median PFS of 13 weeks.