Inhibition of EGFR, HER2, and HER3 signalling in patients with colorectal cancer wild-type for BRAF, PIK3CA, KRAS, and NRAS (FOCUS4-D): a phase 2-3 randomised trial.
ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:A substantial change in trial methodology for solid tumours has taken place, in response to increased understanding of cancer biology. FOCUS4 is a phase 2-3 trial programme testing targeted agents in patients with advanced colorectal cancer in molecularly stratified cohorts. Here, we aimed to test the hypothesis that combined inhibition of EGFR, HER2, and HER3 signalling with the tyrosine kinase inhibitor AZD8931 will control growth of all wild-type tumours. METHODS:In FOCUS4-D, we included patients from 18 hospitals in the UK with newly diagnosed advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer whose tumour was wild-type for BRAF, PIK3CA, KRAS, and NRAS. After 16 weeks of first-line therapy, patients with stable or responding tumours were randomised to oral AZD8931 (40 mg twice a day) or placebo. Randomisation was done by minimisation with a random element of 20%, minimisation by hospital site, site of primary tumour, WHO performance status, 16-week CT scan result, number of metastatic sites, and first-line chemotherapy regimen. The primary outcome was progression-free-survival. CT scans were assessed by local radiologists according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), version 1.1. Preplanned interim analyses were assessed per protocol and were agreed using multiarm multistage (MAMS) trial design methodology triggered by occurrence of progression-free survival events in the placebo group. The final analysis was assessed by intention to treat. This trial is registered at controlled-trials.com, ISRCTN 90061546. FINDINGS:Between July 7, 2014, and March 7, 2016, 32 patients were randomised to study treatment, 16 to AZD8931 and 16 to placebo. At the first preplanned interim analysis (March, 2016), the independent data monitoring committee (IDMC) recommended closure of FOCUS4-D because of a lack of activity. At the final analysis (Aug 1, 2016), 31 patients had had a progression-free survival event (15 with AZD8931 and 16 with placebo). Median progression-free survival was 3·48 months (95% CI 1·51-5·09) in the placebo group and 2·96 months (1·94-5·62) in the AZD8931 group. No progression-free survival benefit of AZD8931 compared with placebo was noted (hazard ratio [HR] 1·10, 95% CI 0·47-3·57; p=0·95). The most common grade 3 adverse event in the AZD8931 group was skin rash (three [20%] of 15 patients with available data vs none of 16 patients in the placebo group), and in the placebo group it was diarrhoea (one [7%] vs one [6%]). No grade 4 adverse events were recorded and no treatment-related deaths were reported. INTERPRETATION:The MAMS trial design for FOCUS4 has shown efficiency and effectiveness in trial outcome delivery, informing the decision to proceed or stop clinical evaluation of a targeted treatment within a molecularly defined cohort of patients. The overarching FOCUS4 trial is now aiming to open a replacement arm in the cohort with all wild-type tumours. FUNDING:Medical Research Council (MRC) and National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation programme, Cancer Research UK, NIHR Clinical Trials Research Network, Health and Care Research Wales, and AstraZeneca.
Project description:BACKGROUND:AZD8931 has equipotent activity against epidermal growth factor receptor, erbB2, and erbB3. Primary objectives were to determine the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of AZD8931 + chemotherapy, and subsequently assess safety/preliminary clinical activity in patients with operable oesophagogastric cancer (OGC). METHODS:AZD8931 (20 mg, 40 mg or 60 mg bd) was given with Xelox (oxaliplatin + capecitabine) for eight 21-day cycles, continuously or with intermittent schedule (4 days on/3 off every week; 14 days on/7 off, per cycle) in a rolling-six design. Subsequently, patients with OGC were randomised 2:1 to AZD8931 + Xelox at RP2D or Xelox only for two cycles, followed by radical oesophagogastric surgery. Secondary outcomes were safety, complete resection (R0) rate, six-month progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival. RESULTS:During escalation, four dose-limiting toxicities were observed among 24 patients: skin rash (1) and failure to deliver 100% of Xelox because of treatment-associated grade III-IV adverse events (AEs) (3: diarrhoea and vomiting; vomiting; fatigue). Serious adverse events (SAE) occurred in 15 of 24 (63%) patients. RP2D was 20-mg bd with the 4/3 schedule. In the expansion phase, 2 of 20 (10%) patients in the Xelox + AZD8931 group and 5/10 (50%) patients in the Xelox group had grade III-IV AEs. Six-month PFS was 85% (90% CI: 66%-94%) in Xelox + AZD8931 and 100% in Xelox alone. Seven deaths (35%) occurred with Xelox + AZD8931 and one (10%) with Xelox. R0 rate was 45% (9/20) with Xelox + AZD8931 and 90% (9/10) with Xelox-alone (P = 0.024). CONCLUSION:Xelox + AZD8931 (20 mg bd 4/3 days) has an acceptable safety profile administered as neoadjuvant therapy in operable patients with OGC. (Trial registration: EudraCT 2011-003169-13, ISRCTN-68093791).
Project description:Evaluate ustekinumab, an anti-interleukin (IL)-12 and IL-23 antibody, effects on radiographic progression in psoriatic arthritis (PsA).We conducted preplanned integrated analyses of combined radiographic data from PSUMMIT-1 and PSUMMIT-2 phase 3, randomised, controlled trials. Patients had active PsA despite prior conventional and/or biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (?5/66 swollen, ?5/68 tender joints, C-reactive protein ?3.0 mg/L, documented plaque psoriasis). Patients (PSUMMIT-1, n=615; PSUMMIT-2, n=312) were randomised to ustekinumab 45 mg, 90 mg, or placebo, at weeks (wk) 0, 4 and every (q) 12 wks. At wk 16, patients with <5% improvement in tender/swollen joint counts entered blinded early escape. All other placebo patients received ustekinumab 45 mg at wk 24 and wk 28, then q 12 wks. Radiographs of hands/feet at wks 0/24/52 were assessed using PsA-modified van der Heijde-Sharp (vdH-S) scores; combined PSUMMIT-1 and PSUMMIT-2 changes in total vdH-S scores from wk 0 to wk 24 comprised the prespecified primary radiographic analysis. Treatment effects were assessed using analysis of variance on van der Waerden normal scores (factors=treatment, baseline methotrexate usage, and study).Integrated data analysis results indicated that ustekinumab-treated patients (regardless of dose) demonstrated significantly less radiographic progression at wk 24 than did placebo recipients (wk 0-24 total vdH-S score mean changes: 0.4-combined/individual ustekinumab dose groups, 1.0-placebo; all p<0.02). From wk 24 to wk 52, inhibition of radiographic progression was maintained for ustekinumab-treated patients, and progression was substantially reduced among initial placebo recipients who started ustekinumab at wk 16 or wk 24 (wk 24 - wk 52, total vdH-S score mean change: 0.08).Ustekinumab 45 and 90 mg treatments significantly inhibited radiographic progression of joint damage in patients with active PsA.
Project description:BACKGROUND:The China Continuation study was a separate regional expansion of the global, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized phase III TOURMALINE-MM1 study of ixazomib plus lenalidomide-dexamethasone (Rd) in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) following one to three prior therapies. METHODS:Patients were randomized (1:1) to receive ixazomib 4.0 mg or placebo on days 1, 8, and 15, plus lenalidomide 25 mg on days 1-21 and dexamethasone 40 mg on days 1, 8, 15, and 22, in 28-day cycles. Randomization was stratified according to number of prior therapies, disease stage, and prior proteasome inhibitor exposure. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). In total, 115 Chinese patients were randomized (57 ixazomib-Rd, 58 placebo-Rd). RESULTS:At the preplanned final analysis for PFS, after median PFS follow-up of 7.4 and 6.9 months, respectively, PFS was improved with ixazomib-Rd versus placebo-Rd (median 6.7 vs 4.0 months; HR 0.598; p?=?0.035). At the preplanned final analysis of overall survival (OS), after median follow-up of 20.2 and 19.1 months, respectively, OS was improved with ixazomib-Rd versus placebo-Rd (median 25.8 vs 15.8 months; HR 0.419; p?=?0.001). On the ixazomib-Rd and placebo-Rd arms, respectively, 38 (67%) and 43 (74%) patients reported grade ?3 adverse events (AEs), 19 (33%) and 18 (31%) reported serious AEs, and 4 (7%) and 5 (9%) died on-study. The most frequent grade 3/4 AEs were thrombocytopenia (18%/7% vs 14%/5%), neutropenia (19%/5% vs 19%/2%), and anemia (12%/0 vs 26%/2%). CONCLUSIONS:This study demonstrated that PFS and OS were significantly improved with ixazomib-Rd versus placebo-Rd, with limited additional toxicity, in patients with RRMM. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01564537.
Project description:Trial 223 was a placebo-controlled trial of neoadjuvant anastrozole alone or with gefitinib in early breast cancer. We used patients from arm B and C: anastrozole 1mg/d for the duration of the 16 week period plus placebo 1 tablet/d orally for 2 weeks. Patients in arm B were followed by gefitinib 250mg/d orally for 14 weeks whereas patients in arm C continued with placebo for 14 weeks. 96 samples
Project description:Resistance to endocrine therapy in breast cancer is associated with activation of the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) intracellular signaling pathway. In early studies, the mTOR inhibitor everolimus added to endocrine therapy showed antitumor activity.In this phase 3, randomized trial, we compared everolimus and exemestane versus exemestane and placebo (randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio) in 724 patients with hormone-receptor-positive advanced breast cancer who had recurrence or progression while receiving previous therapy with a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor in the adjuvant setting or to treat advanced disease (or both). The primary end point was progression-free survival. Secondary end points included survival, response rate, and safety. A preplanned interim analysis was performed by an independent data and safety monitoring committee after 359 progression-free survival events were observed.Baseline characteristics were well balanced between the two study groups. The median age was 62 years, 56% had visceral involvement, and 84% had hormone-sensitive disease. Previous therapy included letrozole or anastrozole (100%), tamoxifen (48%), fulvestrant (16%), and chemotherapy (68%). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were stomatitis (8% in the everolimus-plus-exemestane group vs. 1% in the placebo-plus-exemestane group), anemia (6% vs. <1%), dyspnea (4% vs. 1%), hyperglycemia (4% vs. <1%), fatigue (4% vs. 1%), and pneumonitis (3% vs. 0%). At the interim analysis, median progression-free survival was 6.9 months with everolimus plus exemestane and 2.8 months with placebo plus exemestane, according to assessments by local investigators (hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.43; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.35 to 0.54; P<0.001). Median progression-free survival was 10.6 months and 4.1 months, respectively, according to central assessment (hazard ratio, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.27 to 0.47; P<0.001).Everolimus combined with an aromatase inhibitor improved progression-free survival in patients with hormone-receptor-positive advanced breast cancer previously treated with nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitors. (Funded by Novartis; BOLERO-2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00863655.).
Project description:Lockwood2006 - AlzheimersDisease PBPK
A mathematical model to predict the
effectiveness of CI-1017 (muscarinic agonist) for Alzheimer's
disease by evaluating changes in ADAS-cog score.
This model is described in the article:
Application of clinical
trial simulation to compare proof-of-concept study designs for
drugs with a slow onset of effect; an example in Alzheimer's
Lockwood P, Ewy W, Hermann D,
Pharm. Res. 2006 Sep; 23(9):
OBJECTIVE: Clinical trial simulation (CTS) was used to
select a robust design to test the hypothesis that a new
treatment was effective for Alzheimer's disease (AD).
Typically, a parallel group, placebo controlled, 12-week trial
in 200-400 AD patients would be used to establish drug effect
relative to placebo (i.e., Ho: Drug Effect = 0). We evaluated
if a crossover design would allow smaller and shorter duration
trials. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A family of plausible drug and
disease models describing the time course of the AD assessment
scale (ADAS-Cog) was developed based on Phase I data and
literature reports of other treatments for AD. The models
included pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic, disease progression,
and placebo components. Eight alternative trial designs were
explored via simulation. One hundred replicates of each
combination of drug and disease model and trial design were
simulated. A 'positive trial' reflecting drug activity was
declared considering both a dose trend test (p < 0.05) and
pair-wise comparisons to placebo (p < 0.025). RESULTS: A 4 x
4 Latin Square design was predicted to have at least 80% power
to detect activity across a range of drug and disease models.
The trial design was subsequently implemented and the trial was
completed. Based on the results of the actual trial, a
conclusive decision about further development was taken. The
crossover design provided enhanced power over a parallel group
design due to the lower residual variability. CONCLUSION: CTS
aided the decision to use a more efficient proof of concept
trial design, leading to savings of up to US 4 M dollars in
direct costs and a firm decision 8-12 months earlier than a
12-week parallel group trial.
This model is hosted on
and identified by:
To cite BioModels Database, please use:
Chelliah V et al. BioModels: ten-year
anniversary. Nucl. Acids Res. 2015, 43(Database
To the extent possible under law, all copyright and related or
neighbouring rights to this encoded model have been dedicated to
the public domain worldwide. Please refer to
Public Domain Dedication for more information.
Project description:OBJECTIVES:Patients with Kawasaki disease can develop life-altering coronary arterial abnormalities, particularly in those resistant to intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) therapy. We tested the tumor necrosis factor ? receptor antagonist etanercept for reducing both IVIg resistance and coronary artery (CA) disease progression. METHODS:In a double-blind multicenter trial, patients with Kawasaki disease received either etanercept (0.8 mg/kg; n = 100) or placebo (n = 101) subcutaneously starting immediately after IVIg infusion. IVIg resistance was the primary outcome with prespecified subgroup analyses according to age, sex, and race. Secondary outcomes included echocardiographic CA measures within subgroups defined by coronary dilation (z score >2.5) at baseline. We used generalized estimating equations to analyze z score change and a prespecified algorithm for change in absolute diameters. RESULTS:IVIg resistance occurred in 22% (placebo) and 13% (etanercept) of patients (P = .10). Etanercept reduced IVIg resistance in patients >1 year of age (P = .03). In the entire population, 46 (23%) had a coronary z score >2.5 at baseline. Etanercept reduced coronary z score change in those with and without baseline dilation (P = .04 and P = .001); no improvement occurred in the analogous placebo groups. Etanercept (n = 22) reduced dilation progression compared with placebo (n = 24) by algorithm in those with baseline dilation (P = .03). No difference in the safety profile occurred between etanercept and placebo. CONCLUSIONS:Etanercept showed no significant benefit in IVIg resistance in the entire population. However, preplanned analyses showed benefit in patients >1 year. Importantly, etanercept appeared to ameliorate CA dilation, particularly in patients with baseline abnormalities.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Effective systemic therapies for patients with advanced, progressive neuroendocrine tumours of the lung or gastrointestinal tract are scarce. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of everolimus compared with placebo in this patient population. METHODS:In the randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 RADIANT-4 trial, adult patients (aged ?18 years) with advanced, progressive, well-differentiated, non-functional neuroendocrine tumours of lung or gastrointestinal origin were enrolled from 97 centres in 25 countries worldwide. Eligible patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio by an interactive voice response system to receive everolimus 10 mg per day orally or identical placebo, both with supportive care. Patients were stratified by tumour origin, performance status, and previous somatostatin analogue treatment. Patients, investigators, and the study sponsor were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival assessed by central radiology review, analysed by intention to treat. Overall survival was a key secondary endpoint. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01524783. FINDINGS:Between April 3, 2012, and Aug 23, 2013, a total of 302 patients were enrolled, of whom 205 were allocated to everolimus 10 mg per day and 97 to placebo. Median progression-free survival was 11·0 months (95% CI 9·2-13·3) in the everolimus group and 3·9 months (3·6-7·4) in the placebo group. Everolimus was associated with a 52% reduction in the estimated risk of progression or death (hazard ratio [HR] 0·48 [95% CI 0·35-0·67], p<0·00001). Although not statistically significant, the results of the first pre-planned interim overall survival analysis indicated that everolimus might be associated with a reduction in the risk of death (HR 0·64 [95% CI 0·40-1·05], one-sided p=0·037, whereas the boundary for statistical significance was 0·0002). Grade 3 or 4 drug-related adverse events were infrequent and included stomatitis (in 18 [9%] of 202 patients in the everolimus group vs 0 of 98 in the placebo group), diarrhoea (15 [7%] vs 2 [2%]), infections (14 [7%] vs 0), anaemia (8 [4%] vs 1 [1%]), fatigue (7 [3%] vs 1 [1%]), and hyperglycaemia (7 [3%] vs 0). INTERPRETATION:Treatment with everolimus was associated with significant improvement in progression-free survival in patients with progressive lung or gastrointestinal neuroendocrine tumours. The safety findings were consistent with the known side-effect profile of everolimus. Everolimus is the first targeted agent to show robust anti-tumour activity with acceptable tolerability across a broad range of neuroendocrine tumours, including those arising from the pancreas, lung, and gastrointestinal tract. FUNDING:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation.
Project description: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.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-1? were performed retrospectively.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.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.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.
Project description:The specific clinical benefit of the homeopathic consultation and of homeopathic remedies in patients with depression has not yet been investigated.To investigate the 1) specific effect of individualized homeopathic Q-potencies compared to placebo and 2) the effect of an extensive homeopathic case taking (case history I) compared to a shorter, rather conventional one (case history II) in the treatment of acute major depression (moderate episode) after six weeks.A randomized, partially double-blind, placebo-controlled, four-armed trial using a 2×2 factorial design with a six-week study duration per patient was performed.A total of 44 from 228 planned patients were randomized (2?1?2?1 randomization: 16 homeopathic Q-potencies/case history I, 7 placebo/case history I, 14 homeopathic Q-potencies/case history II, 7 placebo/case history II). Because of recruitment problems, the study was terminated prior to full recruitment, and was underpowered for the preplanned confirmatory hypothesis testing. Exploratory data analyses showed heterogeneous and inconclusive results with large variance in the sample. The mean difference for the Hamilton-D after 6 weeks was 2.0 (95%CI -1.2;5.2) for Q-potencies vs. placebo and -3.1 (-5.9;-0.2) for case history I vs. case history II. Overall, no consistent or clinically relevant results across all outcomes between homeopathic Q-potencies versus placebo and homeopathic versus conventional case taking were observed. The frequency of adverse events was comparable for all groups.Although our results are inconclusive, given that recruitment into this trial was very difficult and we had to terminate early, we cannot recommend undertaking a further trial addressing this question in a similar setting. Prof. Dr. Claudia Witt had full access to all the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT01178255. Protocol publication: http://www.trialsjournal.com/content/12/1/43.