Explore the vast range of titles available.

Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a common heritable disorder displaying marked sexual dimorphism in disease prevalence and progression. Previous genetic association studies have identified a few genetic loci associated with OSA and related quantitative traits, but they have only focused on single ethnic groups, and a large proportion of the heritability remains unexplained. The apnea–hypopnea index (AHI) is a commonly used quantitative measure characterizing OSA severity. Because OSA differs by sex, and the pathophysiology of obstructive events differ in rapid eye movement (REM) and non-REM (NREM) sleep, we hypothesized that additional genetic association signals would be identified by analyzing the NREM/REM-specific AHI and by conducting sex-specific analyses in multiethnic samples. We performed genome-wide association tests for up to 19,733 participants of African, Asian, European, and Hispanic/Latino American ancestry in 7 studies. We identified rs12936587 on chromosome 17 as a possible quantitative trait locus for NREM AHI in men (N = 6,737; P = 1.7 × 10−8) but not in women (P = 0.77). The association with NREM AHI was replicated in a physiological research study (N = 67; P = 0.047). This locus overlapping the RAI1 gene and encompassing genes PEMT1, SREBF1, and RASD1 was previously reported to be associated with coronary artery disease, lipid metabolism, and implicated in Potocki–Lupski syndrome and Smith-Magenis syndrome, which are characterized by abnormal sleep phenotypes. We also identified gene-by-sex interactions in suggestive association regions, suggesting that genetic variants for AHI appear to vary by sex, consistent with the clinical observations of strong sexual dimorphism.

Background: We assessed the treatment effect of panitumumab plus best supportive care (BSC) vs BSC on overall survival (OS) in patients with chemorefractory wild-type KRAS exon 2 metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) and report the first prospective extended RAS analysis in a phase 3 trial. Methods: Patients with wild-type KRAS exon 2 mCRC were randomised 1 : 1 to panitumumab (6 mg kg −1 Q2W) plus BSC or BSC. On-study crossover was prohibited. RAS mutation status was determined by central laboratory testing. The primary endpoint was OS in wild-type KRAS exon 2 mCRC; OS in wild-type RAS mCRC ( KRAS and NRAS exons 2, 3, and 4) was a secondary endpoint. Results: Three hundred seventy seven patients with wild-type KRAS exon 2 mCRC were randomised. Median OS was 10.0 months with panitumumab plus BSC vs 7.4 months with BSC (HR=0.73; 95% CI=0.57–0.93; P =0.0096). RAS ascertainment was 86%. In wild-type RAS mCRC, median OS for panitumumab plus BSC was 10.0 vs 6.9 months for BSC (HR=0.70; 95% CI=0.53–0.93; P =0.0135). Patients with RAS mutations did not benefit from panitumumab (OS HR=0.99; 95% CI=0.49–2.00). No new safety signals were observed. Conclusions: Panitumumab significantly improved OS in wild-type KRAS exon 2 mCRC. The effect was more pronounced in wild-type RAS mCRC, validating previous retrospective analyses.

A stool test that measures mutant KRAS, abnormal gene methylation, and hemoglobin detected significantly more colorectal cancers than a commercial fecal immunochemical test (FIT) but had more false positive results. Colorectal cancer is a major cause of death and disease among men and women in the United States. 1 The underlying neoplastic processes of colorectal carcinogenesis lend themselves to screening. 2 Evidence supports and guidelines endorse several tests and strategies, 3 – 5 and screening for colorectal cancer has been found to be cost-effective. 5 – 7 Despite the supporting evidence, recommendations, and availability of several screening tests, a substantial proportion of the U.S. population is not up to date with screening. 8 A simple, noninvasive test with high sensitivity for both colorectal cancer and advanced precancerous lesions might increase uptake and adherence rates, which could improve . . .

Patients who have colorectal cancer with RAS mutations in exon 2 are unlikely to respond to EGFR blockers. A retrospective analysis of tumors containing other, less common RAS mutations confirms that any RAS mutation is associated with EGFR resistance. KRAS mutation is an established predictive biomarker of resistance to anti–epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. 1 – 4 Specifically, patients with KRAS mutations in exon 2 do not have a response to anti-EGFR therapy and may have inferior outcomes if this therapy is combined with an oxaliplatin-containing chemotherapy regimen. 2 , 5 More accurate selection of patients according to the genetic status of the tumor may improve the benefit–risk profile of anti-EGFR therapy. Activating mutations in RAS ( KRAS or NRAS ) in addition to KRAS mutations in exon 2 have been suggested as negative predictive biomarkers . . .

In the TRIBE study, FOLFOXIRI (fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan) plus bevacizumab significantly improved progression-free survival of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer compared with FOLFIRI (fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan) plus bevacizumab. In this updated analysis, we aimed to provide mature results for overall survival—a secondary endpoint—and report treatment efficacy in RAS and BRAF molecular subgroups. TRIBE was an open-label, multicentre, phase 3 randomised study of patients (aged 18–70 years with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group [ECOG] performance status of 2 or less and aged 71–75 years with an ECOG performance status of 0) with unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer who were recruited from 34 Italian oncology units. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via a web-based procedure to receive FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab or FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab. Bevacizumab was given as a 5 mg/kg intravenous dose. FOLFIRI consisted of a 180 mg/m2 intravenous infusion of irinotecan for 60 min followed by a 200 mg/m2 intravenous infusion of leucovorin for 120 min, a 400 mg/m2 intravenous bolus of fluorouracil, and a 2400 mg/m2 continuous infusion of fluorouracil for 46 h. FOLFOXIRI consisted of a 165 mg/m2 intravenous infusion of irinotecan for 60 min, followed by an 85 mg/m2 intravenous infusion of oxaliplatin given concurrently with 200 mg/m2 leucovorin for 120 min, followed by a 3200 mg/m2 continuous infusion of fluorouracil for 48 h. Tissue samples for RAS and BRAF mutational status analyses were centrally collected. In this updated analysis, we assessed the secondary endpoint of overall survival in the main cohort and treatment efficacy in RAS and BRAF molecular subgroups. All analyses were by intention to treat. TRIBE was concluded on Nov 30, 2014. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00719797. Between July 17, 2008, and May 31, 2011, 508 patients were randomly assigned. At a median follow-up of 48·1 months (IQR 41·7–55·6), median overall survival was 29·8 months (95% CI 26·0–34·3) in the FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab group compared with 25·8 months (22·5–29·1) in the FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·80, 95% CI 0·65–0·98; p=0·03). Median overall survival was 37·1 months (95% CI 29·7–42·7) in the RAS and BRAF wild-type subgroup compared with 25·6 months (22·4–28·6) in the RAS-mutation-positive subgroup (HR 1·49, 95% CI 1·11–1·99) and 13·4 months (8·2–24·1) in the BRAF-mutation-positive subgroup (HR 2·79, 95% CI 1·75–4·46; likelihood-ratio test p<0·0001). Treatment effect was not significantly different across molecular subgroups (pinteraction=0·52). FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab is a feasible treatment option for those patients who meet the inclusion criteria of the present study, irrespective of baseline clinical characteristics and RAS or BRAF mutational status. GONO (Gruppo Oncologico del Nord Ovest) Cooperative Group and ARCO Foundation.

Gemcitabine plus a platinum-based agent (eg, cisplatin or oxaliplatin) is the standard of care for advanced biliary cancers. We investigated the addition of cetuximab to chemotherapy in patients with advanced biliary cancers. In this non-comparative, open-label, randomised phase 2 trial, we recruited patients with locally advanced (non-resectable) or metastatic cholangiocarcinoma, gallbladder carcinoma, or ampullary carcinoma and a WHO performance status of 0 or 1 from 18 hospitals across France and Germany. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) centrally with a minimisation procedure to first-line treatment with gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2) and oxaliplatin (100 mg/m2) with or without cetuximab (500 mg/m2), repeated every 2 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Randomisation was stratified by centre, primary site of disease, disease stage, and previous treatment with curative intent or adjuvant therapy. Investigators who assessed treatment response were not masked to group assignment. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who were progression-free at 4 months, analysed by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00552149. Between Oct 10, 2007, and Dec 18, 2009, 76 patients were assigned to chemotherapy plus cetuximab and 74 to chemotherapy alone. 48 (63%; 95% CI 52–74) patients assigned to chemotherapy plus cetuximab and 40 (54%; 43–65) assigned to chemotherapy alone were progression-free at 4 months. Median progression-free survival was 6·1 months (95% CI 5·1–7·6) in the chemotherapy plus cetuximab group and 5·5 months (3·7–6·6) in the chemotherapy alone group. Median overall survival was 11·0 months (9·1–13·7) in the chemotherapy plus cetuximab group and 12·4 months (8·6–16·0) in the chemotherapy alone group. The most common grade 3–4 adverse events were peripheral neuropathy (in 18 [24%] of 76 patients who received chemotherapy plus cetuximab vs ten [15%] of 68 who received chemotherapy alone), neutropenia (17 [22%] vs 11 [16%]), and increased aminotransferase concentrations (17 [22%] vs ten [15%]). 70 serious adverse events were reported in 39 (51%) of 76 patients who received chemotherapy plus cetuximab (34 events in 19 [25%] patients were treatment-related), whereas 41 serious adverse events were reported in 25 (35%) of 71 patients who received chemotherapy alone (20 events in 12 [17%] patients were treatment-related). One patient died of atypical pneumonia related to treatment in the chemotherapy alone group. The addition of cetuximab to gemcitabine and oxaliplatin did not seem to enhance the activity of chemotherapy in patients with advanced biliary cancer, although it was well tolerated. Gemcitabine and platinum-based combination should remain the standard treatment option. Institut National du Cancer, Merck Serono.

The anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies panitumumab and cetuximab are effective in patients with chemotherapy-refractory wild-type KRAS exon 2 metastatic colorectal cancer. We assessed the efficacy and toxicity of panitumumab versus cetuximab in these patients. For this randomised, open-label, phase 3 head-to-head study, we enrolled patients (from centres in North America, South America, Europe, Asia, Africa, and Australia) aged 18 years or older with chemotherapy-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 2 or less, and wild-type KRAS exon 2 status. Using a computer-generated randomisation sequence, we assigned patients (1:1; stratified by geographical region and ECOG performance status, with a permuted block method) to receive panitumumab (6 mg/kg once every 2 weeks) or cetuximab (initial dose 400 mg/m2; 250 mg/m2 once a week thereafter). The primary endpoint was overall survival assessed for non-inferiority (retention of ≥50% of the cetuximab treatment effect; historical hazard ratio [HR] for cetuximab plus best supportive care vs best supportive care alone of 0·55). The primary analysis included patients who received one or more dose of panitumumab or cetuximab, analysed per allocated treatment. Recruitment for this trial is closed. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01001377. Between Feb 2, 2010, and July 19, 2012, we enrolled and randomly allocated 1010 patients, 999 of whom began study treatment: 499 received panitumumab and 500 received cetuximab. For the primary analysis of overall survival, panitumumab was non-inferior to cetuximab (Z score −3·19; p=0·0007). Median overall survival was 10·4 months (95% CI 9·4–11·6) with panitumumab and 10·0 months (9·3–11·0) with cetuximab (HR 0·97; 95% CI 0·84–1·11). Panitumumab retained 105·7% (81·9–129·5) of the effect of cetuximab on overall survival seen in this study. The incidence of adverse events of any grade and grade 3–4 was similar across treatment groups. Grade 3–4 skin toxicity occurred in 62 (13%) patients given panitumumab and 48 (10%) patients given cetuximab. The occurrence of grade 3–4 infusion reactions was lower with panitumumab than with cetuximab (one [<0·5%] patient vs nine [2%] patients), and the occurrence of grade 3–4 hypomagnesaemia was higher in the panitumumab group (35 [7%] vs 13 [3%]). We recorded one treatment-related fatal adverse event: a lung infection in a patient given cetuximab. Our findings show that panitumumab is non-inferior to cetuximab and that these agents provide similar overall survival benefit in this population of patients. Both agents had toxicity profiles that were to be expected. In view of the consistency in efficacy and toxicity seen, small but meaningful differences in the rate of grade 3–4 infusion reactions and differences in dose scheduling can guide physician choice of anti-EGFR treatment. Amgen Inc.

No targeted therapies are available for KRAS-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Selumetinib is an inhibitor of MEK1/MEK2, downstream of KRAS, with preclinical evidence of synergistic activity with docetaxel in KRAS-mutant cancers. We did a prospective, randomised, phase 2 trial to assess selumetinib plus docetaxel in previously treated patients with advanced KRAS-mutant NSCLC. Eligible patients were older than 18 years of age; had histologically or cytologically confirmed stage IIIB–IV KRAS-mutant NSCLC; had failed first-line therapy for advanced NSCLC; had WHO performance status of 0–1; had not received previous therapy with either a MEK inhibitor or docetaxel; and had adequate bone marrow, renal, and liver function. Patients were randomly assigned (in a 1:1 ratio) to either oral selumetinib (75 mg twice daily in a 21 day cycle) or placebo; all patients received intravenous docetaxel (75 mg/m2 on day 1 of a 21 day cycle). Randomisation was done with an interactive voice response system and investigators, patients, data analysts, and the trial sponsor were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was overall survival, analysed for all patients with confirmed KRAS mutations. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00890825. Between April 20, 2009, and June 30, 2010, we randomly assigned 44 patients to receive selumetinib and docetaxel (selumetinib group) and 43 to receive placebo and docetaxel (placebo group). Of these, one patient in the selumetinib group and three in the placebo group were excluded from efficacy analyses because their tumours were not confirmed to be KRAS-mutation positive. Median overall survival was 9·4 months (6·8–13·6) in the selumetinib group and 5·2 months (95% CI 3·8–non-calculable) in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR] for death 0·80, 80% CI 0·56–1·14; one-sided p=0·21). Median progression-free survival was 5·3 months (4·6–6·4) in the selumetinib group and 2·1 months (95% CI 1·4–3·7) in the placebo group (HR for progression 0·58, 80% CI 0·42–0·79; one-sided p=0·014). 16 (37%) patients in the selumetinib group and none in the placebo group had an objective response (p<0·0001). Adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred in 36 (82%) patients in the selumetinib group and 28 (67%) patients in the placebo group. The most common grade 3–4 adverse events were neutropenia (29 [67%] of 43 patients in the selumetinib group vs 23 [55%] of 42 patients in the placebo group), febrile neutropenia (eight [18%] of 44 patients in the selumetinib group vs none in the placebo group), dyspnoea (one [2%] of 44 patients in the selumetinib group vs five [12%] of 42 in the placebo group), and asthenia (four [9%] of 44 patients in the selumetinib group vs none in the placebo group). Selumetinib plus docetaxel has promising efficacy, albeit with a higher number of adverse events than with docetaxel alone, in previously treated advanced KRAS-mutant NSCLC. These findings warrant further clinical investigation of selumetinib plus docetaxel in KRAS-mutant NSCLC. AstraZeneca.

In the Medical Research Council (MRC) COIN trial, the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-targeted antibody cetuximab was added to standard chemotherapy in first-line treatment of advanced colorectal cancer with the aim of assessing effect on overall survival. In this randomised controlled trial, patients who were fit for but had not received previous chemotherapy for advanced colorectal cancer were randomly assigned to oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy (arm A), the same combination plus cetuximab (arm B), or intermittent chemotherapy (arm C). The choice of fluoropyrimidine therapy (capecitabine or infused fluouroracil plus leucovorin) was decided before randomisation. Randomisation was done centrally (via telephone) by the MRC Clinical Trials Unit using minimisation. Treatment allocation was not masked. The comparison of arms A and C is described in a companion paper. Here, we present the comparison of arm A and B, for which the primary outcome was overall survival in patients with KRAS wild-type tumours. Analysis was by intention to treat. Further analyses with respect to NRAS, BRAF, and EGFR status were done. The trial is registered, ISRCTN27286448. 1630 patients were randomly assigned to treatment groups (815 to standard therapy and 815 to addition of cetuximab). Tumour samples from 1316 (81%) patients were used for somatic molecular analyses; 565 (43%) had KRAS mutations. In patients with KRAS wild-type tumours (arm A, n=367; arm B, n=362), overall survival did not differ between treatment groups (median survival 17·9 months [IQR 10·3–29·2] in the control group vs 17·0 months [9·4–30·1] in the cetuximab group; HR 1·04, 95% CI 0·87–1·23, p=0·67). Similarly, there was no effect on progression-free survival (8·6 months [IQR 5·0–12·5] in the control group vs 8·6 months [5·1–13·8] in the cetuximab group; HR 0·96, 0·82–1·12, p=0·60). Overall response rate increased from 57% (n=209) with chemotherapy alone to 64% (n=232) with addition of cetuximab (p=0·049). Grade 3 and higher skin and gastrointestinal toxic effects were increased with cetuximab (14 vs 114 and 67 vs 97 patients in the control group vs the cetuximab group with KRAS wild-type tumours, respectively). Overall survival differs by somatic mutation status irrespective of treatment received: BRAF mutant, 8·8 months (IQR 4·5–27·4); KRAS mutant, 14·4 months (8·5–24·0); all wild-type, 20·1 months (11·5–31·7). This trial has not confirmed a benefit of addition of cetuximab to oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy in first-line treatment of patients with advanced colorectal cancer. Cetuximab increases response rate, with no evidence of benefit in progression-free or overall survival in KRAS wild-type patients or even in patients selected by additional mutational analysis of their tumours. The use of cetuximab in combination with oxaliplatin and capecitabine in first-line chemotherapy in patients with widespread metastases cannot be recommended. Cancer Research UK, Cancer Research Wales, UK Medical Research Council, Merck KGgA.

Erlotinib is registered for treatment of all patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, its efficacy for treatment of patients whose tumours are EGFR wild-type—which includes most patients—is still contentious. We assessed the efficacy of erlotinib compared with a standard second-line chemotherapy in such patients. We did this randomised controlled trial in 52 Italian hospitals. We enrolled patients who had metastatic NSCLC, had had platinum-based chemotherapy, and had wild-type EGFR as assessed by direct sequencing. Patients were randomly assigned centrally (1:1) to receive either erlotinib orally 150 mg/day or docetaxel intravenously 75 mg/m2 every 21 days or 35 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15, every 28 days. Randomisation was stratified by centre, stage, type of first-line chemotherapy, and performance status. Patients and investigators who gave treatments or assessed outcomes were not masked to treatment allocation, investigators who analysed results were. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00637910. We screened 702 patients, of whom we genotyped 540. 222 patients were enrolled (110 assigned to docetaxel vs 112 assigned to erlotinib). Median overall survival was 8·2 months (95% CI 5·8–10·9) with docetaxel versus 5·4 months (4·5–6·8) with erlotinib (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·73, 95% CI 0·53–1·00; p=0·05). Progression-free survival was significantly better with docetaxel than with erlotinib: median progression-free survival was 2·9 months (95% CI 2·4–3·8) with docetaxel versus 2·4 months (2·1–2·6) with erlotinib (adjusted HR 0·71, 95% CI 0·53–0·95; p=0·02). The most common grade 3–4 toxic effects were: low absolute neutrophil count (21 [20%] of 104 in the docetaxel group vs none of 107 in the erlotinib group), skin toxic effects (none vs 15 [14%]), and asthenia (ten [10%] vs six [6%]). Our results show that chemotherapy is more effective than erlotinib for second-line treatment for previously treated patients with NSCLC who have wild-type EGFR tumours. Agenzia Italiana del Farmaco.