PURPOSE NALA (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01808573 ) is a randomized, active-controlled, phase III trial comparing neratinib, an irreversible pan-HER tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), plus capecitabine (N+C) against lapatinib, a reversible dual TKI, plus capecitabine (L+C) in patients with centrally confirmed HER2-positive, metastatic breast cancer (MBC) with ≥ 2 previous HER2-directed MBC regimens. METHODS Patients, including those with stable, asymptomatic CNS disease, were randomly assigned 1:1 to neratinib (240 mg once every day) plus capecitabine (750 mg/m2 twice a day 14 d/21 d) with loperamide prophylaxis, or to lapatinib (1,250 mg once every day) plus capecitabine (1,000 mg/m2 twice a day 14 d/21 d). Coprimary end points were centrally confirmed progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). NALA was considered positive if either primary end point was met (α split between end points). Secondary end points were time to CNS disease intervention, investigator-assessed PFS, objective response rate (ORR), duration of response (DoR), clinical benefit rate, safety, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). RESULTS A total of 621 patients from 28 countries were randomly assigned (N+C, n = 307; L+C, n = 314). Centrally reviewed PFS was improved with N+C (hazard ratio [HR], 0.76; 95% CI, 0.63 to 0.93; stratified log-rank P = .0059). The OS HR was 0.88 (95% CI, 0.72 to 1.07; P = .2098). Fewer interventions for CNS disease occurred with N+C versus L+C (cumulative incidence, 22.8% v 29.2%; P = .043). ORRs were N+C 32.8% (95% CI, 27.1 to 38.9) and L+C 26.7% (95% CI, 21.5 to 32.4; P = .1201); median DoR was 8.5 versus 5.6 months, respectively (HR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.74; P = .004). The most common all-grade adverse events were diarrhea (N+C 83% v L+C 66%) and nausea (53% v 42%). Discontinuation rates and HRQoL were similar between groups. CONCLUSION N+C significantly improved PFS and time to intervention for CNS disease versus L+C. No new N+C safety signals were observed.

Abstract. MicroRNAs (miRs) are a class of single-stranded RNA molecules of 15-27 nucleotides in length that regulate gene expression at the post-translational level. miR-21 is one of the earliest identified cancer-promoting 'oncomiRs', targeting numerous tumor suppressor genes associated with proliferation, apoptosis and invasion. The regulation of miR-21 and its role in carcinogenesis have been extensively investigated. Recent studies have focused on the diagnostic and prognostic value of miR-21 as well as its implication in the drug resistance of human malignancies. The further use of miR-21 as a biomarker and target for cancer treatments is likely to improve the outcome for patients with cancer. The present review highlights recent findings associated with the importance of miR-21 in hematological and non-hematological malignancies. IntroductionMicroRNAs (miRs) are a class of naturally occurring short non-coding RNA molecules of 15-27 nucleotides in length that regulate eukaryotic gene expression at the post-transcriptional level. Almost 2,000 human miRNAs have been identified through cloning and/or sequence analysis (1). They have key regulatory roles in the development, differentiation and apoptosis of normal cells, as well as in the determination of the final phenotype of cancer cells, affecting carcinogenesis and metastatic potential (2). miR-21 is an abundantly expressed miRNA in mammalian cells, whose upregulation is associated with numerous types of cancer (3,4). By generation of a conditional miR-21 knock-in mouse, it was demonstrated that miR-21 functions as an oncogene with its overexpression resulting in malignant B-cell lymphoma (5). Indeed, miR-21 was found to be the only consistently upregulated miRNA in a study that profiled 540 clinical samples from cancer patients (6). The majority of studies on miR-21 have focused on its role in carcinogenesis and its clinical application. miR-21 is also expressed in hematopoietic cells of the immune system, including B/T cells, monocytes, macrophages and dendritic cells. High miR-21 levels are, therefore, considered to be a marker of immune cell activation (7). Regarding pathological necrosis, miR-21 enhances cellular necrosis by negatively regulating tumor suppressor genes associated with the death receptor-mediated intrinsic apoptotic pathway (8). Biological function of miR-21The biological functions of various miRNAs, including miR-21, have been extensively investigated and miR-21 is

www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT 01287585).

<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab significantly improved overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) versus sorafenib in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in IMbrave150. Efficacy and safety data from the Chinese subpopulation are reported. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> IMbrave150, a global, randomized, open-label, phase 3 study in patients with systemic treatment-naive unresectable HCC, included an extension phase that enrolled additional patients from mainland China. Patients were randomized (2:1) to receive intravenous atezolizumab 1,200 mg plus bevacizumab 15 mg/kg once every 3 weeks or sorafenib 400 mg twice a day until unacceptable toxicity or loss of clinical benefit. Co-primary endpoints were OS and independent review facility-assessed PFS per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 in the intention-to-treat population. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Of 194 Chinese patients enrolled from April 16, 2018, to April 8, 2019 (137 in the global study and 57 in the China extension phase), 133 received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and 61 received sorafenib. At the data cutoff (August 29, 2019), the stratified hazard ratio for OS was 0.44 (95% CI, 0.25–0.76) and for PFS was 0.60 (95% CI, 0.40–0.90). The respective median OS and PFS with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab were not reached (NR; 95% CI, 13.5 months to NR) and 5.7 months (95% CI, 4.2–8.3) versus 11.4 months (95% CI, 6.7 to NR) and 3.2 months (95% CI, 2.6–4.8) with sorafenib. Grade 3–4 adverse events (AEs) occurred in 78 of 132 (59.1%) atezolizumab plus bevacizumab-treated and 27 of 58 (46.6%) sorafenib-treated patients. The most common grade 3–4 AE with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab was hypertension, occurring in 15.2% of patients; however, other high-grade AEs were infrequent. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> Clinically meaningful improvements in OS and PFS observed with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus sorafenib suggest that atezolizumab plus bevacizumab may become a practice-changing treatment for Chinese patients with unresectable HCC.

1002 Background: NALA (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01808573) is a multinational, randomized, open-label, phase III trial of neratinib (an irreversible pan-HER tyrosine kinase inhibitor [TKI]) + capecitabine (N+C) vs lapatinib (a reversible dual TKI) + capecitabine (L+C) in patients with stage IV HER2+ metastatic breast cancer (MBC) who had received ≥2 prior HER2-directed regimens for MBC. Methods: Patients were randomized 1:1 to N (240 mg qd po) + C (750 mg/m2 bid po) or L (1250 mg qd po) + C (1000 mg/m2 bid po). Co-primary endpoints were centrally assessed progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints were investigator-assessed PFS; objective response rate (ORR); duration of response (DoR); clinical benefit rate (CBR); time to intervention for symptomatic metastatic central nervous system (CNS) disease; safety; and patient-reported health outcomes. Results: 621 patients were randomized (307 to N+C; 314 to L+C). The risk of disease progression or death was reduced by 24% with N+C vs L+C (HR = 0.76; 95% CI 0.63–0.93; p = 0.006); 6- and 12-month PFS rates were 47.2% vs 37.8% and 28.8% vs 14.8% for N+C vs L+C, respectively. OS rates at 6 and 12 months were 90.2% vs 87.5% and 72.5% vs 66.7% for N+C vs L+C, respectively (HR = 0.88; 95% CI 0.72–1.07; p = 0.2086). ORR in patients with measurable disease at screening was improved with N+C vs L+C (32.8% vs 26.7%; p = 0.1201), as was CBR (44.5% vs 35.6%; p = 0.0328) and DoR (HR = 0.50; 95% CI 0.33–0.74; p = 0.0004). Time to intervention for symptomatic CNS disease (overall cumulative incidence 22.8% vs 29.2%; p = 0.043) was delayed with N+C vs L+C. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were similar between arms, but there was a higher rate of grade 3 diarrhea with N+C vs L+C (24.4% vs 12.5%). TEAEs leading to neratinib/lapatinib discontinuation were lower with neratinib (10.9%) than with lapatinib (14.5%). Conclusions: N+C significantly improved PFS with a trend towards improved OS vs L+C. N+C also resulted in a delayed time to intervention for symptomatic CNS disease. Tolerability was similar between the two arms, with no new safety signals observed. Clinical trial information: NCT01808573.