Dataset Information

Open-Label, Randomized, Multicenter, Phase III Study Comparing Oral Paclitaxel Plus Encequidar Versus Intravenous Paclitaxel in Patients With Metastatic Breast Cancer.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

Intravenous paclitaxel (IVpac) is complicated by neuropathy and requires premedication to prevent hypersensitivity-type reactions. Paclitaxel is poorly absorbed orally; encequidar (E), a novel P-glycoprotein pump inhibitor, allows oral absorption.

Methods

A phase III open-label study comparing oral paclitaxel plus E (oPac + E) 205 mg/m² paclitaxel plus 15 mg E methanesulfonate monohydrate 3 consecutive days per week versus IVpac 175 mg/m² once every 3 weeks was performed. Women with metastatic breast cancer and adequate organ function, at least 1 year from last taxane, were randomly assigned 2:1 to oPac + E versus IVpac. The primary end point was confirmed radiographic response using RECIST 1.1, assessed by blinded independent central review. Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).

Results

Four hundred two patients from Latin America were enrolled (265 oPac + E, 137 IVpac); demographics and prior therapies were balanced. The confirmed response (intent-to-treat) was 36% for oPac + E versus 23% for IVpac (P = .01). The PFS was 8.4 versus 7.4 months, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.768; 95.5% CI, 0.584 to 1.01; P = .046), and the OS was 22.7 versus 16.5 months, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.794; 95.5% CI, 0.607 to 1.037; P = .08). Grade 3-4 adverse reactions were 55% with oPac + E and 53% with IVpac. oPac + E had lower incidence and severity of neuropathy (2% v 15% > grade 2) and alopecia (49% v 62% all grades) than IVpac but more nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and neutropenic complications, particularly in patients with elevated liver enzymes. On-study deaths (8% oPac + E v 9% IVpac) were treatment-related in 3% and 0%, respectively.

Conclusion

oPac + E increased the confirmed tumor response versus IVpac, with trends in PFS and OS. Neuropathy was less frequent and severe with oPac + E; neutropenic serious infections were increased. Elevated liver enzymes at baseline predispose oPac + E patients to early neutropenia and serious infections (funded by Athenex, Inc; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02594371).

SUBMITTER: Rugo HS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9788977 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Open-Label, Randomized, Multicenter, Phase III Study Comparing Oral Paclitaxel Plus Encequidar Versus Intravenous Paclitaxel in Patients With Metastatic Breast Cancer.

Rugo Hope S HS Umanzor Gerardo A GA Barrios Francisco J FJ Vasallo Rosa H RH Chivalan Marco A MA Bejarano Suyapa S Ramírez Julio R JR Fein Luis L Kowalyszyn Ruben D RD Kramer E Douglas ED Wang Hui H Kwan Min-Fun R MR Cutler David L DL

Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology 20220720 1

<h4>Purpose</h4>Intravenous paclitaxel (IVpac) is complicated by neuropathy and requires premedication to prevent hypersensitivity-type reactions. Paclitaxel is poorly absorbed orally; encequidar (E), a novel P-glycoprotein pump inhibitor, allows oral absorption.<h4>Methods</h4>A phase III open-label study comparing oral paclitaxel plus E (oPac + E) 205 mg/m<sup>2</sup> paclitaxel plus 15 mg E methanesulfonate monohydrate 3 consecutive days per week versus IVpac 175 mg/m<sup>2</sup> once every 3 ...[more]

PMID: 35858154

Similar Datasets

Project description:PURPOSE:This trial aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of the paclitaxel plus fluorouracil regimen versus the cisplatin plus fluorouracil regimen in definitive concurrent chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) in patients with locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). PATIENTS AND METHODS:Patients with locally advanced ESCC were enrolled and randomly assigned to either the paclitaxel plus fluorouracil group or the cisplatin plus fluorouracil group. The patients in the paclitaxel plus fluorouracil group were treated with paclitaxel and fluorouracil one cycle per week in dCRT for five cycles followed by paclitaxel and fluorouracil one cycle per month in consolidation chemotherapy for two cycles. The patients in the cisplatin/5-fluorouracil group were treated with cisplatin and fluorouracil one cycle per month in dCRT for two cycles followed by two cycles in consolidation chemotherapy. The radiotherapy dose was 61.2 Gy delivered in 34 fractions. The primary end point was 3-year overall survival (OS). RESULTS:Four hundred thirty-six patients with ESCC in six centers were recruited at a 1:1 ratio between April 2012 and July 2015. The median follow-up of the surviving patients was 48.7 months (interquartile range, 42.6-60.9). The 3-year OS was 55.4% in the paclitaxel plus fluorouracil group and 51.8% in the cisplatin plus fluorouracil group (hazard ratio, 0.905 [95% CI, 0.698 to 1.172]; P = .448). The 3-year progression-free survival was also not significantly different between the paclitaxel plus fluorouracil group and the cisplatin plus fluorouracil group (43.7% v 45.5%, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.973 [95% CI, 0.762 to 1.243]; P = .828). Compared with the cisplatin plus fluorouracil group, the paclitaxel plus fluorouracil group had significantly lower incidences of acute grade 3 or higher anemia, thrombocytopenia, anorexia, nausea, vomiting, and fatigue (P < .05), but higher incidences of acute grade 3 or higher leukopenia, radiation dermatitis, and radiation pneumonitis (P < .05). CONCLUSION:The paclitaxel plus fluorouracil regimen did not significantly prolong the OS compared with the standard cisplatin plus fluorouracil regimen in dCRT in patients with locally advanced ESCC.

Project description:BackgroundLipusu is the first commercialized liposomal formulation of paclitaxel and has demonstrated promising efficacy against locally advanced lung squamous cell carcinoma (LSCC) in a small-scale study. Here, we conducted a multicenter, randomized, phase 3 study to compare the efficacy and safety of cisplatin plus Lipusu (LP) versus cisplatin plus gemcitabine (GP) as first-line treatment in locally advanced or metastatic LSCC.MethodsPatients enrolled were aged between 18 to 75 years, had locally advanced (clinical stage IIIB, ineligible for concurrent chemoradiation or surgery) or metastatic (Stage IV) LSCC, had no previous systemic chemotherapy and at least one measurable lesion as per the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (version 1.1) before administration of the trial drug. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). The secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), overall survival (OS), and safety profiles. To explore the possible predictive value of plasma cytokines for LP treatment, plasma samples were collected from the LP group at baseline and first efficacy evaluation time and were then subjected to analysis by 45-Plex ProcartaPlex Panel 1 to detect the presence of 45 cytokines using the Luminex xMAP technology. The correlation between treatment outcomes and dynamic changes in the levels of cytokines were evaluated in preliminary analyses.ResultsThe median duration of follow-up was 15.4 months. 237 patients in the LP group and 253 patients in the GP group were included in the per protocol set (PPS). In the PPS, the median PFS was 5.2 months versus 5.5 months in the LP and GP group (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.03, P = 0.742) respectively. The median OS was 14.6 months versus 12.5 months in the LP and GP group (HR: 0.83, P = 0.215). The ORR (41.8% versus 45.9%, P = 0.412) and DCR (90.3% versus 88.1%, P = 0.443) were also similar between the LP and GP group. A significantly lower proportion of patients in the LP group experienced adverse events (AEs) leading to treatment interruptions (10.9% versus 26.4%, P < 0.001) or treatment termination (14.3% versus 23.1%, P = 0.011). The analysis of cytokine levels in the LP group showed that low baseline levels of 27 cytokines were associated with an increased ORR, and 15 cytokines were associated with improved PFS, with 14 cytokines, including TNF-α, IFN-γ, IL-6, and IL-8, demonstrating an overlapping trend.ConclusionThe LP regimen demonstrated similar PFS, OS, ORR and DCR as the GP regimen for patients with locally advanced or metastatic LSCC but had more favorable toxicity profiles. The study also identified a spectrum of different cytokines that could be potentially associated with the clinical benefit in patients who received the LP regimen.

Dataset Information

Open-Label, Randomized, Multicenter, Phase III Study Comparing Oral Paclitaxel Plus Encequidar Versus Intravenous Paclitaxel in Patients With Metastatic Breast Cancer.

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Open-Label, Randomized, Multicenter, Phase III Study Comparing Oral Paclitaxel Plus Encequidar Versus Intravenous Paclitaxel in Patients With Metastatic Breast Cancer.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets