Sara E Kochanny1, Francis P Worden2, Douglas R Adkins3, Dean W Lim4, Julie E Bauman5, Stephanie A Wagner6, Ryan J Brisson7, Theodore G Karrison1, Walter M Stadler1, Everett E Vokes1, Tanguy Y Seiwert8. 1. The University of Chicago Medicine Comprehensive Cancer Center, Chicago, Illinois. 2. Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan Hospital and Health Systems, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 3. Siteman Cancer Center, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri. 4. Department of Medicine, City of Hope, Duarte, California. 5. Department of Hematology and Oncology, University of Arizona Cancer Center, Phoenix, Arizona. 6. Simon Cancer Center, Indiana University, Indianapolis, Indiana. 7. Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine, Rochester, Michigan. 8. Kimmel Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: MET signaling is a well described mechanism of resistance to anti-EGFR therapy, and MET overexpression is common in head and neck squamous cell carcinomas (HNSCCs). In the current trial, the authors compared the oral MET inhibitor tivantinib (ARQ197) in combination with cetuximab (the TC arm) versus a control arm that received cetuximab monotherapy (C) in patients with recurrent/metastatic HNSCC. METHODS: In total, 78 evaluable patients with cetuximab-naive, platinum-refractory HNSCC were enrolled, including 40 on the TC arm and 38 on the C arm (stratified by human papillomavirus [HPV] status). Patients received oral tivantinib 360 mg twice daily and intravenous cetuximab 500 mg/m2 once every 2 weeks. The primary outcome was the response rate (according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1), and secondary outcomes included progression-free and overall survival. After patients progressed on the C arm, tivantinib monotherapy was optional. RESULTS: The response rate was 7.5% in the TC arm (N = 3; 1 complete response) and 7.9% in the C arm (N = 3; not significantly different [NS]). The median progression-free survival in both arms was 4 months (NS), and the median overall survival was 8 months (NS). Both treatments were well tolerated, with a trend toward increased hematologic toxicities in the TC arm (12.5% had grade 3 leukopenia). The response rate in 31 HPV-positive/p16-positive patients was 0% in both arms, whereas the response rate in HPV-negative patients was 12.7% (12.5% in the TC arm and 13% in the C arm). Fifteen patients received tivantinib monotherapy, and no responses were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Combined tivantinib plus cetuximab does not significantly improve the response rate or survival compared with cetuximab alone but does increase toxicity in an unselected HNSCC population. Cetuximab responses appear to be limited to patients who have HPV-negative HNSCC. MET-aberration-focused trials for HNSCC and the use of higher potency, selective MET inhibitors remain of interest.
BACKGROUND: MET signaling is a well described mechanism of resistance to anti-EGFR therapy, and MET overexpression is common in head and neck squamous cell carcinomas (HNSCCs). In the current trial, the authors compared the oral MET inhibitor tivantinib (ARQ197) in combination with cetuximab (the TC arm) versus a control arm that received cetuximab monotherapy (C) in patients with recurrent/metastatic HNSCC. METHODS: In total, 78 evaluable patients with cetuximab-naive, platinum-refractory HNSCC were enrolled, including 40 on the TC arm and 38 on the C arm (stratified by human papillomavirus [HPV] status). Patients received oral tivantinib 360 mg twice daily and intravenous cetuximab 500 mg/m2 once every 2 weeks. The primary outcome was the response rate (according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1), and secondary outcomes included progression-free and overall survival. After patients progressed on the C arm, tivantinib monotherapy was optional. RESULTS: The response rate was 7.5% in the TC arm (N = 3; 1 complete response) and 7.9% in the C arm (N = 3; not significantly different [NS]). The median progression-free survival in both arms was 4 months (NS), and the median overall survival was 8 months (NS). Both treatments were well tolerated, with a trend toward increased hematologic toxicities in the TC arm (12.5% had grade 3 leukopenia). The response rate in 31 HPV-positive/p16-positive patients was 0% in both arms, whereas the response rate in HPV-negative patients was 12.7% (12.5% in the TC arm and 13% in the C arm). Fifteen patients received tivantinib monotherapy, and no responses were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Combined tivantinib plus cetuximab does not significantly improve the response rate or survival compared with cetuximab alone but does increase toxicity in an unselected HNSCC population. Cetuximab responses appear to be limited to patients who have HPV-negative HNSCC. MET-aberration-focused trials for HNSCC and the use of higher potency, selective MET inhibitors remain of interest.
Authors: Tanguy Y Seiwert; Barbara Burtness; Ranee Mehra; Jared Weiss; Raanan Berger; Joseph Paul Eder; Karl Heath; Terrill McClanahan; Jared Lunceford; Christine Gause; Jonathan D Cheng; Laura Q Chow Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2016-05-27 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Sudharshan Eathiraj; Rocio Palma; Erika Volckova; Marscha Hirschi; Dennis S France; Mark A Ashwell; Thomas C K Chan Journal: J Biol Chem Date: 2011-03-24 Impact factor: 5.157
Authors: Timothy A Yap; David Olmos; Andre T Brunetto; Nina Tunariu; Jorge Barriuso; Ruth Riisnaes; Lorna Pope; Jeremy Clark; Andrew Futreal; Michael Germuska; David Collins; Nandita M deSouza; Martin O Leach; Ronald E Savage; Carol Waghorne; Feng Chai; Edward Garmey; Brian Schwartz; Stan B Kaye; Johann S de Bono Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2011-03-07 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Michaela K Keck; Zhixiang Zuo; Arun Khattri; Thomas P Stricker; Christopher D Brown; Matin Imanguli; Damian Rieke; Katharina Endhardt; Petra Fang; Johannes Brägelmann; Rebecca DeBoer; Mohamed El-Dinali; Serdal Aktolga; Zhengdeng Lei; Patrick Tan; Steve G Rozen; Ravi Salgia; Ralph R Weichselbaum; Mark W Lingen; Michael D Story; K Kian Ang; Ezra E W Cohen; Kevin P White; Everett E Vokes; Tanguy Y Seiwert Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2014-12-09 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Petr Szturz; Marie Budíková; Jan B Vermorken; Ivana Horová; Břetislav Gál; Eric Raymond; Armand de Gramont; Sandrine Faivre Journal: Oral Oncol Date: 2017-09-27 Impact factor: 5.337
Authors: Nicole G Chau; Bayardo Perez-Ordonez; Katherine Zhang; Nhu-An Pham; James Ho; Tong Zhang; Olga Ludkovski; Lisa Wang; Eric X Chen; Ming-Sound Tsao; Suzanne Kamel-Reid; Lillian L Siu Journal: Head Neck Oncol Date: 2011-02-27
Authors: Tanguy Seiwert; John Sarantopoulos; Howard Kallender; Stewart McCallum; Harold N Keer; George Blumenschein Journal: Invest New Drugs Date: 2012-08-24 Impact factor: 3.850
Authors: Lova Sun; Danielle Candelieri-Surette; Tori Anglin-Foote; Julie A Lynch; Kara N Maxwell; Christopher D'Avella; Aditi Singh; Erin Aakhus; Roger B Cohen; Robert M Brody Journal: JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg Date: 2022-09-22 Impact factor: 8.961
Authors: Ana Belén Griso; Lucía Acero-Riaguas; Beatriz Castelo; José Luis Cebrián-Carretero; Ana Sastre-Perona Journal: Cells Date: 2022-02-05 Impact factor: 6.600