The irreversible ErbB family blocker afatinib and the reversible EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor gefitinib are approved for first-line treatment of EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of afatinib and gefitinib in this setting.
This multicentre, international, open-label, exploratory, randomised controlled phase 2B trial (LUX-Lung 7) was done at 64 centres in 13 countries. Treatment-naive patients with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC and a common EGFR mutation (exon 19 deletion or Leu858Arg) were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive afatinib (40 mg per day) or gefitinib (250 mg per day) until disease progression, or beyond if deemed beneficial by the investigator. Randomisation, stratified by EGFR mutation type and status of brain metastases, was done centrally using a validated number generating system implemented via an interactive voice or web-based response system with a block size of four. Clinicians and patients were not masked to treatment allocation; independent review of tumour response was done in a blinded manner. Coprimary endpoints were progression-free survival by independent central review, time-to-treatment failure, and overall survival. Efficacy analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population and safety analyses were done in patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This ongoing study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01466660.
Between Dec 13, 2011, and Aug 8, 2013, 319 patients were randomly assigned (160 to afatinib and 159 to gefitinib). Median follow-up was 27·3 months (IQR 15·3-33·9). Progression-free survival (median 11·0 months [95% CI 10·6-12·9] with afatinib vs 10·9 months [9·1-11·5] with gefitinib; hazard ratio [HR] 0·73 [95% CI 0·57-0·95], p=0·017) and time-to-treatment failure (median 13·7 months [95% CI 11·9-15·0] with afatinib vs 11·5 months [10·1-13·1] with gefitinib; HR 0·73 [95% CI 0·58-0·92], p=0·0073) were significantly longer with afatinib than with gefitinib. Overall survival data are not mature. The most common treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events were diarrhoea (20 [13%] of 160 patients given afatinib vs two [1%] of 159 given gefitinib) and rash or acne (15 [9%] patients given afatinib vs five [3%] of those given gefitinib) and liver enzyme elevations (no patients given afatinib vs 14 [9%] of those given gefitinib). Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 17 (11%) patients in the afatinib group and seven (4%) in the gefitinib group. Ten (6%) patients in each group discontinued treatment due to drug-related adverse events. 15 (9%) fatal adverse events occurred in the afatinib group and ten (6%) in the gefitinib group. All but one of these deaths were considered unrelated to treatment; one patient in the gefitinib group died from drug-related hepatic and renal failure.
Afatinib significantly improved outcomes in treatment-naive patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC compared with gefitinib, with a manageable tolerability profile. These data are potentially important for clinical decision making in this patient population.
Boehringer Ingelheim.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Schedule your 30 min Free 1stOncology Demo!
Discover why more than 1,500 members use 1stOncology™ to excel in:

Early/Late Stage Pipeline Development - Target Scouting - Clinical Biomarkers - Indication Selection & Expansion - BD&L Contacts - Conference Reports - Combinatorial Drug Settings - Companion Diagnostics - Drug Repositioning - First-in-class Analysis - Competitive Analysis - Deals & Licensing

                  Schedule Your 30 min Free Demo!

Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) are widely used for treating chronic kidney disease (CKD)-associated anemia. The biological activity of ESAs is mainly regulated by the number of sialic acid-containing carbohydrates on the erythropoietin (EPO) peptide. Sialidase, a sialic acid-metabolizing enzyme that accumulates in CKD patients, is suspected of contributing to shortening the circulation half-life of ESAs. Epoetin beta pegol (continuous erythropoietin receptor activator; C.E.R.A.), is an EPO integrated with methoxypolyethylene glycol (PEG). It has been suggested that C.E.R.A. may exert a favorable therapeutic effect, even under conditions of elevated sialidase; however, no detailed investigation of the pharmacological profile of C.E.R.A. in the presence of sialidase has been reported. In the present study, we injected C.E.R.A. or EPO pre-incubated with sialidase into rats, and assessed the hematopoietic effect by reticulocyte count. The hematopoietic effect of C.E.R.A., but not EPO, was preserved after sialidase treatment, despite the removal of sialic acid. Proliferation of EPO-dependent leukemia cells (AS-E2) was significantly increased by desialylated C.E.R.A. and EPO compared to non-treated C.E.R.A. or EPO. In conclusion, we show that C.E.R.A. exerts a favorable hematopoietic effect even under conditions of elevated sialidase. Our findings may contribute to a better understanding of CKD and more effective therapeutic approaches based on a patient’s profile of anemia.

Schedule your 30 min Free 1stOncology Demo!
Discover why more than 1,500 members use 1stOncology™ to excel in:

Early/Late Stage Pipeline Development - Target Scouting - Clinical Biomarkers - Indication Selection & Expansion - BD&L Contacts - Conference Reports - Combinatorial Drug Settings - Companion Diagnostics - Drug Repositioning - First-in-class Analysis - Competitive Analysis - Deals & Licensing

                  Schedule Your 30 min Free Demo!

The Giens 2015 Workshop Round Table entitled "What specifications for a centre or network of excellence in clinical research?" took a viewpoint distinct from earlier work and studies on changes in clinical research activities in France. The purpose of the present work was to identify, starting from concrete examples, the main strengths and advantages of clinical research activity in France related, in part, to the background environment and also to the specific characteristics of the investigation centres considered to be among the most high-performance units in activity. The criteria retained were grouped into a set of specifications that could be used to establish a "label of excellence" upon which the different teams and clinical research centres could model themselves. It was thus considered that belonging to a centre or structured network with at least a national configuration, when this is possible for the medial topic in question, constitutes a real advantage. Four benchmarks were identified: the scientific and clinical expertise of the head investigator, as well as the qualification and operational capacity of the centre’s team; definition and measurement of performance using clearly displayed indicators and evaluation procedures; the quality of the overall trial "process" and of each of its component steps; communication, because know-how and promotion go hand in hand, with the main objective of informing the professional and general public about the value of the research centre meeting the above-mentioned criteria, about its networks of competencies, and more generally, about the important assets of the background of clinical research in France. This sector of research is funded by the public authorities via calls for public grants, financial aids for structures supporting clinical research in the University Hospital Centres and other healthcare institutions allowing for a professionalization of the research occupations, and the national public health plans (cancer, rare disease, HIV).
Copyright © 2016. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.

Schedule your 30 min Free 1stOncology Demo!
Discover why more than 1,500 members use 1stOncology™ to excel in:

Early/Late Stage Pipeline Development - Target Scouting - Clinical Biomarkers - Indication Selection & Expansion - BD&L Contacts - Conference Reports - Combinatorial Drug Settings - Companion Diagnostics - Drug Repositioning - First-in-class Analysis - Competitive Analysis - Deals & Licensing

                  Schedule Your 30 min Free Demo!

Short intensive chemotherapy is the standard of care for adult patients with Burkitt’s leukaemia or lymphoma. Findings from single-arm studies suggest that addition of rituximab to these regimens could improve patient outcomes. Our objective was to test this possibility in a randomised trial.
In this randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 3 trial, we recruited patients older than 18 years with untreated HIV-negative Burkitt’s lymphoma (including Burkitt’s leukaemia) from 45 haematological centres in France. Exclusion criteria were contraindications to any drug included in the chemotherapy regimens, any serious comorbidity, poor renal (creatinine concentration >150 μmol/L) or hepatic (cirrhosis or previous hepatitis B or C) function, pregnancy, and any history of cancer except for non-melanoma skin tumours or stage 0 (in situ) cervical carcinoma. Patients were stratified into two groups based on disease extension (absence [group B] or presence [group C] of bone marrow or central nervous system involvement). Patients were further stratified in group C according to age (<40 years, 40-60 years, and >60 years) and central nervous system involvement. Participants were randomly assigned in each group to either intravenous rituximab injections and chemotherapy (lymphome malin B [LMB]) or chemotherapy alone by the Groupe d’Etude des Lymphomes de l’Adulte datacentre. Randomisation was stratified by treatment group and centre using computer-assisted permuted-block randomisation (block size of four; allocation ratio 1:1). We gave rituximab (375 mg/m(2)) on day 1 and day 6 during the first two courses of chemotherapy (total of four infusions). The primary endpoint is 3 year event-free survival (EFS). We analysed all patients who had data available according to their originally assigned group. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00180882.
Between Oct 14, 2004, and Sept 7, 2010, we randomly allocated 260 patients to rituximab or no rituximab (group B 124 patients [64 no rituximab; 60 rituximab]; group C 136 patients [66 no rituximab; 70 rituximab]). With a median follow-up of 38 months (IQR 24-59), patients in the rituximab group achieved better 3 year EFS (75% [95% CI 66-82]) than did those in the no rituximab group (62% [53-70]; log-rank p stratified by treatment group=0·024). The hazard ratio estimated with a Cox model stratified by treatment group, assuming proportionality, was 0·59 for EFS (95% CI 0·38-0·94; p=0·025). Adverse events did not differ between the two treatment groups. The most common adverse events were infectious (grade 3-4 in 137 [17%] treatment cycles in the rituximab group vs 115 [15%] in the no rituximab group) and haematological (mean duration of grade 4 neutropenia of 3·31 days per cycle [95% CI 3·01-3·61] vs 3·38 days per cycle [3·05-3·70]) events.
Addition of rituximab to a short intensive chemotherapy programme improves EFS in adults with Burkitt’s leukaemia or lymphoma.
Gustave Roussy Cancer Campus, Roche, Chugai, Sanofi.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Schedule your 30 min Free 1stOncology Demo!
Discover why more than 1,500 members use 1stOncology™ to excel in:

Early/Late Stage Pipeline Development - Target Scouting - Clinical Biomarkers - Indication Selection & Expansion - BD&L Contacts - Conference Reports - Combinatorial Drug Settings - Companion Diagnostics - Drug Repositioning - First-in-class Analysis - Competitive Analysis - Deals & Licensing

                  Schedule Your 30 min Free Demo!

On April 16, 2016 Abpro, an integrated life science company at the forefront of synthetic biology, reported a partnership with Essex Bio, a China-based biopharmaceutical company (Press release, abpro therapeutics, APR 16, 2016, View Source [SID1234525612]). Abpro and Essex will co-develop multiple monoclonal antibodies in immuno-oncology and ophthalmology by leveraging Abpro’s DiversImmune platform. Abpro received a $3.5M equity investment from Essex Bio and an undisclosed amount from affiliates, as part of the agreement.

Schedule your 30 min Free 1stOncology Demo!
Discover why more than 1,500 members use 1stOncology™ to excel in:

Early/Late Stage Pipeline Development - Target Scouting - Clinical Biomarkers - Indication Selection & Expansion - BD&L Contacts - Conference Reports - Combinatorial Drug Settings - Companion Diagnostics - Drug Repositioning - First-in-class Analysis - Competitive Analysis - Deals & Licensing

                  Schedule Your 30 min Free Demo!

"This partnership with Essex Bio adds further validation to our discovery platform and provides an opportunity to advance novel therapeutics with one of the largest ophthalmology companies in China, which is the second largest pharmaceutical market in the world," said Ian Chan, CEO of Abpro. "This agreement results in a strong partnership with R&D efforts and significant capabilities both in the United States and China."

"Abpro’s unique proprietary platform has proven to be successful against traditionally difficult targets for antibodies and offers significant potential for us to co-develop novel therapeutic treatments for immuno-oncology and ophthalmic diseases," said Patrick Ngiam, Founder and Chairman of Essex Bio. "We look forward to leveraging this platform to advance monoclonal assets into the clinic and onto commercialization."

According to the agreement, Abpro will receive an upfront equity investment from Essex Bio and affiliates. The companies will advance multiple assets through pre-clinical and clinical development and seek commercial authorizations. Essex Bio holds commercial rights to these assets in China, and Abpro retains commercialization rights in the U.S. and rest of world, excluding China, with cross-royalties from each region. Through its DiversImmune platform, Abpro generates antibodies with high sensitivity and specificity for advancing human health.

Abpro’s products and discovery services are used by leading academic labs and companies around the world for life science research purposes, such as therapeutics, diagnostics and research products. Abpro has formed multiple partnerships around novel biomolecules with leading biotechnology and international pharmaceutical companies including Amgen, Eli Lilly, Genzyme, MedImmune, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and others. In addition, Abpro has collaborated with several academic research centers, including Harvard University, Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Stanford University.