PURPOSE Pegylated recombinant human hyaluronidase (PEGPH20) degrades hyaluronan (HA) and, in combination with chemotherapy, prolongs survival in preclinical models. The activity of PEGPH20 with modified fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (mFOLFIRINOX) was evaluated in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPC). MATERIALS AND METHODS Patients had untreated mPC, a performance status of 0 to 1, and adequate organ function. Tumor HA status was not required for eligibility. After a phase Ib dose-finding study of mFOLFIRINOX plus PEGPH20, the phase II open-label study randomly assigned patients (1:1) to the combination arm or to mFOLFIRINOX alone (n = 138). The primary end point was overall survival (OS). RESULTS PEGPH20 dosages of 3 µg/kg every 2 weeks were more tolerable than twice-weekly dosages used in the phase I study, so 3 µg/kg every 2 weeks was the phase II dosage. An amendment instituted enoxaparin prophylaxis in the PEGPH20 combination arm as a result of increased thromboembolic (TE) events. The planned interim futility analysis when 35 deaths (of 103 analyzable patients) occurred resulted in an OS hazard ratio (HR) of 2.07 that favored the control arm, and the study was closed to accrual. The treatment-related grade 3 to 4 toxicity was significantly increased in the PEGPH20 combination arm relative to control (odds ratio, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.1 to 7.1). The median OS in the mFOLFIRINOX arm was 14.4 months (95% CI, 10.1 to 15.7 months) versus 7.7 months (95% CI, 4.6 to 9.3 months) in the PEGPH20 combination arm. CONCLUSION Addition of PEGPH20 to mFOLFIRINOX seems to be detrimental in patients unselected for tumor HA status. This combination caused increased toxicity (mostly GI and TE events) and resulted in decreased treatment duration compared with mFOLFIRINOX alone. The median OS in the mFOLFIRINOX control arm (14.4 months) is, to our knowledge, the longest yet reported and can be considered for patients with good PS.

SUMMARY Importance KRAS mutations are very common in pancreatic cancer, but directly targeting the KRAS protein has thus far been unsuccessful. The aim of this trial was to block the MEK and PI3K/AKT pathways downstream of the KRAS protein as an alternate treatment strategy to slow cancer growth and prolong survival. This was the first cooperative group trial to evaluate this strategy using molecularly targeted oral combination therapy for the treatment of chemotherapy refractory pancreatic cancer. Objective SWOG S1115 was a randomized phase 2 study of selumetinib and MK-2206 versus modified FOLFOX in patients who failed gemcitabine-based therapy. Design, Setting, and Participants Between September 2012 and May 2014, 137 patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma who failed gemcitabine-based chemotherapy were randomized to selumetinib plus MK-2206 or mFOLFOX. Patients were randomized in a 1:1 fashion and stratified according to duration of prior systemic therapy and presence of liver metastases. Interventions Patients received selumetinib 100 mg orally per day plus MK-2206 135 mg orally once per week or mFOLFOX (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2 intravenous and 5-fluorouracil 2,400 mg/m2 intravenous infusion over 46–48 hours) on days 1 and 15 with each cycle being 28 days. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary endpoint of the study was overall survival. Secondary objectives included evaluating toxicities, objective tumor response and progression free survival (PFS). Results Median OS was shorter in the experimental arm (3.9 vs 6.7 months, HR=1.37, p=0.15). PFS was also inferior in the experimental arm (HR=1.61, p=0.02). One vs five patients had a partial response and 12 vs 14 patients had stable disease in the selumetinib plus MK-2206 arm versus (vs) mFOLFOX. Grade 3 or higher toxicities were observed in 39 patients treated with selumetinib and MK-2206 vs 23 patients treated with mFOLFOX. More patients on the experimental arm discontinued therapy due to adverse events, as well. Conclusions and Relevance Although, dual targeting of MEK and PI3K/AKT pathways downstream of KRAS by selumetinib plus MK-2206 did not improve overall survival in patients who failed gemcitabine-based chemotherapy, this was the first randomized prospective evaluation of mFOLFOX in the U.S. population which showed comparable results to CONKO-003 and PANCREOX. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01658943

3505 Background: Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients (pts) with BRAFV600 mutations have poor outcomes with standard of care chemotherapy and rarely respond to the BRAF inhibitor vemurafenib. In preclinical models, blockade of BRAFV600 by vemurafenib (V) causes feedback upregulation of EGFR, whose signaling activities can be impeded by cetuximab (C) with anti-tumor activity augmented by irinotecan (I). Methods: Pts with BRAFV600 mutated and extended RAS wild-type mCRC were randomized to irinotecan (180 mg/m2 IV every 14 days) and cetuximab (500 mg/m2 IV every 14 days) with or without vemurafenib (960 mg PO twice daily). Eligible pts had ECOG PS ≤1, and had received 1 or 2 prior regimens with no prior anti-EGFR agents. Randomization was stratified for prior irinotecan. Crossover from the control arm (IC) to the experimental arm (VIC) was allowed after documented progression. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS, investigator assessed), with 90% power to detect a HR of 0.5, with two-sided type 1 error of 5%. Results: 106 pts were enrolled (99 eligible, 49 in the experimental arm) from 12/2014 to 4/2016, with median age 62 years, 59% female, and 39% with prior irinotecan therapy. PFS was improved with the addition of vemurafenib (HR 0.42, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.26 to 0.66, P < 0.001) with median PFS of 4.4 (95% CI 3.6 – 5.7) mos vs 2.0 (95% CI 1.8 – 2.1) months. Response rate was 16% vs 4% (P = 0.08), with disease control rate of 67% vs 22%. In pts with no prior irinotecan, median PFS was 5.7 (95% CI 3.0-6.1) months in the VIC arm vs 1.9 (95% CI 1.7 – 2.1) months in the IC arm. Grade 3/4 adverse events higher in the VIC arm included neutropenia (28% vs 7%), anemia (13% vs 0%), and nausea (15% vs 0%). There was no increase in skin toxicity or fatigue. 23 pts (46%) in the IC arm crossed over at the time of progression, with median PFS from crossover of 6.0 months (95% CI 3.7 – 7.4). Overall survival (OS) data will be mature for ASCO 2017. Conclusions: These results demonstrate the clinical benefits of the VIC triplet (vemurafenib, cetuximab, and irinotecan) in pts with treatment-refractory BRAFV600 mutated mCRC, and support VIC as a potential new treatment option in this molecular subset. Clinical trial information: NCT02164916.

Treatment options for neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) remain limited. This trial assessed the progression-free survival (PFS) of bevacizumab or interferon alfa-2b (IFN-a-2b) added to octreotide among patients with advanced NETs. Patients and MethodsSouthwest Oncology Group (SWOG) S0518, a phase III study conducted in a US cooperative group system, enrolled patients with advanced grades 1 and 2 NETs with progressive disease or other poor prognostic features. Patients were randomly assigned to treatment with octreotide LAR 20 mg every 21 days with either bevacizumab 15 mg/kg every 21 days or 5 million units of IFN-a-2b three times per week. The primary end point was centrally assessed PFS. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT00569127. ResultsA total of 427 patients was enrolled, of whom 214 were allocated to bevacizumab and 213 to IFNa-2b. The median PFS by central review was 16.6 months (95% CI, 12.9 to 19.6 months) in the bevacizumab arm and was 15.4 months (95% CI, 9.6 to 18.6 months) in the IFN arm (hazard ratio [HR], 0.93; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.18; P = .55). By site review, the median PFS times were 15.4 months (95% CI, 12.6 to 17.2 months) for bevacizumab and 10.6 months (95% CI, 8.5 to 14.4 months) for interferon (HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.72 to 1.12; P = .33). Time to treatment failure was longer with bevacizumab than with IFN (HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.89; P = .003). Confirmed radiologic response rates were 12% (95% CI, 8% to 18%) for bevacizumab and 4% (95% CI, 2% to 8%) for IFN. Common adverse events with bevacizumab and octreotide included hypertension (32%), proteinuria (9%), and fatigue (7%); with IFN and octreotide, they included fatigue (27%), neutropenia (12%), and nausea (6%). ConclusionNo significant differences in PFS were observed between the bevacizumab and IFN arms, which suggests that these agents have similar antitumor activity among patients with advanced NETs.