Aza C treatment results in significantly higher response rates, improved quality of life, reduced risk of leukemic transformation, and improved survival compared with supportive care. Aza C provides a new treatment option that is superior to supportive care for patients with the MDS subtypes and specific entry criteria treated in this study.

No abstract

Merck KGaA, and Pfizer Inc.

The doses of chemotherapy used to treat breast cancer, especially early breast cancer, should not be reduced if the maximal benefit is to be achieved.

Improved quality of life for patients treated with Aza C coupled with significantly greater treatment response and delayed time to transformation to acute myeloid leukemia or death compared with patients on supportive care (P <.001) establishes Aza C as an important treatment option for myelodysplastic syndrome.

Purpose We have shown the feasibility of administering inhaled doxorubicin to patients with cancer. This study evaluated inhaled doxorubicin combined with cisplatin and docetaxel in patients with non–small cell lung cancer. The principal objective was to determine safety and, secondarily, efficacy. Experimental Design Patients who had chemo-naïve advanced non–small cell lung cancer were enrolled in the study. Adequate organ and pulmonary function was required: diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide/forced expiratory volume in 1 second/forced vital capacity ≥50%, resting/exercise O2 saturation ≥90%/85%. In phase I, doxorubicin was escalated: dose level 1 (6 mg/m2) and level 2 (7.5 mg/m2). Escalation was permitted if ≤2 of 6 patients experienced pulmonary dose-limiting toxicity (grade 2 Radiation Therapy Oncology Group lung morbidity; resting O2 saturation of <85%; decrease in diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide, forced vital capacity, or forced expiratory volume in 1 second of ≥20% from baseline or ≤30% of predicted; or grade 3 Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 3.0 pulmonary toxicity). Doses of cisplatin and docetaxel were 75 mg/m2. Treatments and pulmonary function tests were repeated every 21 days, with up to eight cycles for responding patients. Results Twenty-eight patients were treated at level 1 and eight patients at level 2. Doxorubicin was escalated to 7.5 mg/m2, however, after two patients developed pulmonary dose-limiting toxicity; the remainder were treated at 6.0 mg/m2. Twenty-four evaluable patients received at least two courses or had progressive disease following the first course at the phase II dose. Toxicity was associated with i.v. chemotherapy although one patient had delayed pulmonary toxicity responding to corticosteroids and oxygen. Seven (29%) evaluable patients responded (six partial responses and one complete response) and 13 (54%) patients had stable disease for up to eight cycles. Conclusion Although this combination was safe, the primary objective was not met and will not be pursued further.

PET did not improve the time to progression or survival in patients with extensive SCLC compared with EP alone and was associated with unacceptable toxicity.

BackgroundAnti-programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1)/programmed cell death 1 antibodies have shown clinical activity in platinum-treated metastatic urothelial carcinoma, resulting in regulatory approval of several agents, including avelumab (anti-PD-L1). We report ≥2-year follow-up data for avelumab treatment and exploratory subgroup analyses in patients with urothelial carcinoma.MethodsPatients with previously treated advanced/metastatic urothelial carcinoma, pooled from two cohorts of the phase Ib JAVELIN Solid Tumor trial, received avelumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity or withdrawal. End points included best overall response and progression-free survival (PFS) per RECIST V.1.1, overall survival (OS) and safety. Post hoc analyses included objective response rates (ORRs) in subgroups defined by established high-risk/poor-prognosis characteristics and association between time to response and outcome.Results249 patients received avelumab; efficacy was assessed in 242 postplatinum patients. Median follow-up was 31.9 months (range 24–43), and median treatment duration was 2.8 months (range 0.5–42.8). The confirmed ORR was 16.5% (95% CI 12.1% to 21.8%; complete response in 4.1% and partial response in 12.4%). Median duration of response was 20.5 months (95% CI 9.7 months to not estimable). Median PFS was 1.6 months (95% CI 1.4 to 2.7 months) and the 12-month PFS rate was 16.8% (95% CI 11.9% to 22.4%). Median OS was 7.0 months (95% CI 5.9 to 8.5 months) and the 24-month OS rate was 20.1% (95% CI 15.2% to 25.4%). In post hoc exploratory analyses, avelumab showed antitumor activity in high-risk subgroups, including elderly patients and those with renal insufficiency or upper tract disease; ORRs were numerically lower in patients with liver metastases or low albumin levels. Objective response achieved by 3 months versus later was associated with longer OS (median not reached (95% CI 18.9 months to not estimable) vs 7.1 months (95% CI 5.2 to 9.0 months)). Safety findings were consistent with previously reported 6-month analyses.ConclusionsAfter ≥2 years of follow-up, avelumab showed prolonged efficacy and acceptable safety in patients with platinum-treated advanced/metastatic urothelial carcinoma, including high-risk subgroups. Survival appeared longer in patients who responded within 3 months. Long-term safety findings were consistent with earlier reports with avelumab treatment in this patient population.