A. B. C. H1975 xenografts: long-term treatment

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
C.P. Belani 1, T. Brodowicz 2, P. Peterson 3, W. John 3, G. Scagliotti 4 1 Penn State Cancer Institute, Hershey, PA USA; 2 Medical University, Vienna,
Advertisements

Herceptin® (trastuzumab) in combination with chemotherapy: pivotal metastatic breast cancer survival data 1.
First-Line TKI Use in EGFR Mutation-Positive NSCLC
Appendix Supplementary data (online only) to: Marleen Kok, Wilbert Zwart, Caroline Holm, Renske Fles, Michael Hauptmann, Laura J. Van ’t Veer, Lodewyk.
Please note, these are the actual video-recorded proceedings from the live CME event and may include the use of trade names and other raw, unedited content.
Phase III Trial of Pazopanib in Locally Advanced and/or Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Sternberg CN et al. ASCO 2009; Abstract (Oral Presentation)
Final Efficacy Results from OAM4558g, a Randomized Phase II Study Evaluating MetMAb or Placebo in Combination with Erlotinib in Advanced NSCLC Spigel DR.
until tumour progression until tumour progression
Clinical outcome according to tumor HER2 status and EGFR expression in advanced gastric cancer patients from the EXPAND study F. Lordick,* Y-K. Kang, P.
Clinical Trials 2015 Practical Session 2. Exercise I Normally Distributed Response Data H 0 :  = 0 H a :  =  a > 0 n=? α=0.05 (two-sided) β=0.20 
Response, PFS or OS – what is the best endpoint in advanced colorectal cancer? Marc Buyse IDDI, Louvain-la-Neuve & Hasselt University
ESMO 2016 Nivolumab Data Study Ph Indication Line N Arms 1o EP ORR mDR
Blood-based biomarkers for cancer immunotherapy: Tumor mutational burden in blood (bTMB) is associated with improved atezolizumab (atezo) efficacy in.
Copyright © 2013 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
ESMO 2016 Durvalumab Data Study / Abstract Ph Indication Line N Arms
Mamounas EP et al. Proc SABCS 2012;Abstract S1-10.
Higher Vitamin D Levels Associated With Improved Survival in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer CCO Independent Conference Highlights of the 2015 ASCO Annual.
Belani CP et al. ASCO 2009; Abstract CRA8000. (Oral Presentation)
在使用Sorafenib治療肝細胞癌過程中患有
A cura di Filippo de Marinis
© The Author(s) Published by Science and Education Publishing.
Pazopanib: the role in the treatment of mRCC
LUX-Lung 6 clinical trial
ELOQUENT-2: Elotuzumab + Len/Dex in R/R MM
ASPEN: Prolonged PFS With Sunitinib vs Everolimus in Nonclear-Cell RCC CCO Independent Conference Highlights of the 2015 ASCO Annual Meeting* May 29 -
Farletuzumab in platinum sensitive ovarian cancer with low CA125
Rosell R et al. Proc ASCO 2011;Abstract 7503.
Maintenance Lapatinib After Chemotherapy in HER1/2-Positive Metastatic Bladder Cancer CCO Independent Conference Highlights of the 2015 ASCO Annual Meeting*
TBCRC (the translational breast cancer research consortium) 005 Prospective study
Prognostic and Predictive Value of the 21-Gene Recurrence Score Assay in Postmenopausal Women with Node-Positive, Estrogen- Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer.
Phase III Trial (MPACT) of Weekly nab-Paclitaxel Plus Gemcitabine in Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer: Influence of Prognostic Factors of Survival J Tabernero,
CCO Independent Conference Coverage
Final results of the phase III, randomised, double-blind AVOREN trial of first-line bevacizumab + interferon-a2a in metastatic renal cell carcinoma Escudier.
Intervista a Angelo Delmonte
Bevacizumab in platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer: OCEANS.
until tumour progression until tumour progression
The nab-Paclitaxel Difference
Regulatory Industry Statistics Workshop 2018
Barrios C et al. SABCS 2009;Abstract 46.
Coiffier B et al. Proc ASH 2010;Abstract 857.
Baselga J et al. SABCS 2009;Abstract 45.
Effects of AG-221 treatment on survival and cell differentiation in an IDH2R140Q primary human AML xenograft model. Effects of AG-221 treatment on survival.
Table 2. Progression-Free Survival
A B Yeom Supplementary Fig.2
Domenica 03 giugno Highlight a cura di Filippo de Marinis
The development and use of vascular targeted therapy in ovarian cancer
Lunedì 04 giugno Highlight a cura di Filippo de Marinis
A Correlative Biomarker Analysis of the Combination of Bevacizumab and Carboplatin- Based Chemotherapy for Advanced Nonsquamous Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer:
Fig. 4. BET inhibition sensitizes HR-proficient tumors to PARPi treatment in vivo. BET inhibition sensitizes HR-proficient tumors to PARPi treatment in.
Effects of Pharmacokinetic Processes and Varied Dosing Schedules on the Dynamics of Acquired Resistance to Erlotinib in EGFR-Mutant Lung Cancer  Jasmine.
CYCLE 1A Supplemental Figure
Intervista a Filippo de Marinis
Randomized Phase 2b Study of Pralatrexate Versus Erlotinib in Patients With Stage IIIB/IV Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) After Failure of Prior Platinum-Based.
Cetuximab with chemotherapy as 1st-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis of the CRYSTAL and OPUS studies according to KRAS.
Adjuvant chemotherapy after potentially curative resection of metastases from colorectal cancer. A meta-analysis of two randomized trials E Mitry, A Fields,
Flow diagram for exclusions of trials identified RCT indicates randomized controlled trial Hulten E, et al. Arch Intern Med 2006;166:
R Hermann6, P Sportelli7, L Gardner7 and J Bendell8
Baseline characteristics for patients with diabetes in ASCOT-LLA Part I P.S. SEVER et al Diabetes Care 2005; 28: 1151–1157.
Nab-paclitaxel: lo stato dell’arte
Patient Disposition James A. de Lemos et al. JAMA 2004; 292:
Supplementary Fig S1, Zembutsu H et al.
Empiric versus Site-Directed Chemotherapy in Cancer of Unknown Primary
Efficacy of BSI-201, a PARP Inhibitor, in Combination with Gemcitabine/Carboplatin (GC) in Triple Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer (mTNBC): Results.
PD-L1 and tumor-associated macrophages in de novo DLBCL
Figure S1. A. B. Figure S1. Kaplan-Meier curve of progression-free survival by treatment group in soluble heregulin (HRG)-high population (A) and soluble.
Active AR signaling in enzalutamide-resistant xenograft tumors.
Kaplan–Meier curves for PFS and OS (for patients treated with anti-PD-1/PD-L1 monotherapy). Kaplan–Meier curves for PFS and OS (for patients treated with.
Combined loss of MPG and ATM sensitizes pGBM cells to temozolomide (TMZ) in vivo. Combined loss of MPG and ATM sensitizes pGBM cells to temozolomide (TMZ)
Activity of a chemically modified miR-21 inhibitor in human bladder cancer xenografts. Activity of a chemically modified miR-21 inhibitor in human bladder.
Supplemental Material
Presentation transcript:

A. B. C. H1975 xenografts: long-term treatment Vehicle CED 6 mg/kg Resistant Tumors B. P = 0.015 vehicle CED VAN P = 0.057 C. H1975 xenografts: short-term treatment A549 xenografts: long-term treatment Vehicle CED 6 mg/kg Resistant Tumors Cascone et al., Figure S1

A. C. B. Cascone et al., Figure S2 Common angiogenic human genes 42 43 VAN prog. vs. VAN sens. CED prog. CED sens. 42 43 14 56 57 VAN sens VAN prog Tumor genes VAN-resistant vs. sensitive tumors CED prog CED sens Tumor genes in CED-resistant vs. CED-sensitive tumors Significant human angiogenic genes in VAN-prog. vs. VAN-sens. H1975 tumors Significant human angiogenic genes in CED-prog. vs. CED-sens. tumors C. B. MARS TNFSF15 HIF3A RPS7 AGGF1 PTGS1 PGF PPIA IL6 SPTBN1 PSME2 PTN MOCS3 CASP1 Cascone et al., Figure S2

VAN vehicle progression sensitive p-MET Cascone et al., Figure S3

A. B. H1975 cells HCC827 cells vector HGF.20 HGF (pg/106 cells) vector 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 vector HGF.20 HGF (pg/106 cells) A. HCC827 cells P < 0.0001 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 vector HGF.24 HGF (pg/106 cells) B. H1975 cells P < 0.0001 Cascone et al., Figure S4

A. B. H1975 xenograft tumors CAIX CAIX staining score vehicle VAN sensitive progression CAIX A. sensitive progression vehicle VAN CAIX staining score B. P = 0.02 100 200 300 Cascone et al, Figure S5

Pazopanib in phase II trial of mRCC PFS Probability 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 Weeks 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 Plasma HGF < Median (E/N = 108/216) Median PFS 53 weeks Plasma HGF ≥ Median (E/N = 108/216) Median PFS 28 weeks P = 0.016 Cascone, Figure S6

Cascone, Supplementary Table S1&2 Table S1. Mouse angiogenic genes modulated in VAN-resistant (progression) vs. sensitive (14 days) H1975 xenografts Gene ID SYMBOL VAN prog (log2 value) VAN sens Fold Change P value ILMN_1229161 Eng 7.98624 7.98407 6.19711 6.41261 6.90484 2.79 0.025 ILMN_2763245 Cxcl1 7.55128 9.07913 7.29075 7.28179 6.80426 2.28 0.079 ILMN_2916116 Rps7 11.54232 11.47146 9.93707 9.93815 11.41153 2.11 0.037 ILMN_1237666 Hgf 7.18368 7.30979 6.39711 6.41852 5.75835 2.08 0.020 ILMN_2729153 Nos3 6.785550 6.15684 5.55489 5.60969 5.94719 1.70 0.073 ILMN_2696977 Rpl37 13.0061 12.9586 13.6961 13.6690 13.8357 -1.68 0.002 ILMN_2946520 Npy 5.72519 5.70043 6.61058 6.54797 6.34713 -1.72 0.072 Table S2. Mouse angiogenic genes modulated in CED-resistant (progression) vs. sensitive (14 days) H1975 xenografts Gene ID SYMBOL CED sens (log2 value) CED prog CED sens (log2 value) Fold Change P value ILMN_1229161 Eng 6.35332 6.66675 8.86604 8.99963 6.25625 7.74032 2.628 0.019 ILMN_2763245 Cxcl1 6.69334 7.42467 6.80038 8.94976 6.62117 6.39420 2.227 0.058 ILMN_2788593 Nos3 6.01167 5.73389 7.63807 7.82470 5.95675 6.26566 1.983 0.01 ILMN_2729153 5.49441 5.72546 6.96693 6.66490 5.47735 6.02569 1.725 0.042 ILMN_1237666 Hgf 5.96278 6.58285 6.62600 6.70666 5.97292 5.89457 1.619 0.079 ILMN_2946520 Npy 6.83175 6.49361 5.76208 5.69766 6.72164 6.68929 -1.697 0.053 ILMN_2696977 Rpl37 13.9512 13.205 13.0442 14.0691 13.8039 -1.795 0.0003 Cascone, Supplementary Table S1&2

Cascone, Supplementary Table 3 Table S3. Human angiogenic genes modulated in VAN-resistant (progression) vs. VAN-sensitive (14 days) H1975 xenografts Gene ID SYMBOL VAN prog (log2 value) VAN sens Fold Change P value ILMN_1663015 HIF3A 11.0225 7.34189 6.33413 5.54658 5.19534 11.237 0.0001 ILMN_1661335 SPTBN1 5.45943 9.64889 5.34234 5.7439 5.119 4.446 0.015 ILMN_2287061 6.65076 7.96981 5.11436 5.3466 5.282 4.177 0.000002 ILMN_1704529 PPIA 6.33985 8.22862 5.48542 5.15785 5.0793 4.122 0.06 ILMN_1809813 PGF 7.87375 7.69306 6.84561 5.66163 4.9316 3.919 0.0005 ILMN_2070072 RPS7 9.04589 5.61294 5.57591 5.142 5.3656 3.913 0.053 ILMN_2339835 PTGS1 9.03510 5.11603 5.36211 5.3512 5.2577 3.368 0.057 ILMN_1786612 PSME2 5.16832 8.37551 5.07424 5.2269 5.2968 2.974 0.054 ILMN_1699651 IL6 6.05809 7.55604 5.25851 5.4805 2.872 0.04 ILMN_1759501 TNFSF15 7.21247 5.80915 5.53946 5.12432 5.2299 2.318 0.036 ILMN_2064917 AGGF1 6.83668 5.48671 5.20202 5.19377 5.2961 1.907 0.045 ILMN_1799819 MARS 6.27015 6.26472 5.46466 5.2913 5.2604 1.903 0.033 ILMN_1687481 6.70293 5.32624 5.21101 5.04832 5.4138 1.729 0.002 ILMN_1813753 PTN 5.22689 5.37121 8.10951 5.6002 -2.143 0.062 ILMN_2326509 CASP1 5.30414 5.36036 7.54 5.47508 6.7092 -2.366 0.042 ILMN_1766652 MOCS3 5.46727 5.68762 8.8423 6.77728 6.2088 -3.246 0.018 Cascone, Supplementary Table 3

Cascone , Supplementary Table 4 Table S4. Human angiogenic genes modulated in CED-resistant (progression) vs. CED-sensitive (14 days) H1975 xenografts Gene ID SYMBOL CED prog (log2 value) CED sens Fold Change P value ILMN_1704529 PPIA 5.46695 6.57758 11.33459 5.2315 5.33127 6.27593 4.532 0.027 ILMN_1661335 SPTBN1 8.34775 9.1293 9.09035 6.5697 6.59245 7.14435 4.249 0.009 ILMN_1663015 HIF3A 7.30113 5.34802 8.14496 5.42357 5.38024 5.1815 3.038 0.022 ILMN_1699651 IL6 7.78542 6.23285 7.39874 5.43095 5.80529 5.78031 2.764 0.028 ILMN_1766652 MOCS3 5.93404 5.48639 8.71942 5.32012 5.37955 5.54596 2.459 0.039 ILMN_1759501 TNFSF15 5.43396 5.45516 8.28331 5.36806 5.2114 5.43629 2.074 0.041 ILMN_2287061 6.02547 5.33055 6.43112 5.35508 5.23572 5.32624 1.54 0.026 ILMN_1799819 MARS 6.70418 7.50279 5.49217 7.51514 7.52591 7.12814 -1.77 0.034 ILMN_1813753 PTN 7.25936 6.14057 5.42223 7.19908 7.35526 7.52904 -2.124 ILMN_2064917 AGGF1 5.67666 7.58022 5.64414 7.23993 7.55405 7.60866 -2.246 0.007 ILMN_1809813 PGF 5.30706 5.29535 5.16309 6.68915 6.65892 6.12122 -2.353 0.008 ILMN_1786612 PSME2 8.6355 8.4577 5.50398 8.79769 8.96037 9.27728 -2.788 0.043 ILMN_2070072 RPS7 5.26228 6.66576 5.66362 7.25474 7.25408 8.0882 -3.179 0.066 ILMN_2326509 CASP1 5.23457 6.61338 5.33378 7.67912 7.9338 8.39025 -4.836 0.0003 ILMN_2339835 PTGS1 5.41582 6.83605 5.42827 8.24174 8.42815 8.50597 -5.651 0.004 Cascone , Supplementary Table 4

Cascone, Supplementary Table 5&6 Table S5. Predictive plasma HGF at baseline adjusted by gender and smoking among VAN and CP arms in the NSCLC phase II study  C/AF VAN arm Chemotherapy (CP) arm P for interaction* Median PFS (Days) HR Plasma Low HGF 121 (40, 202) 1.437 (1.038-1.988) 140 (47, 194) 0.777 (0.544-1.110) 0.0357 [HR 0.612 (0.387-0.968)] Plasma High HGF 80 (21,149) 167 (145, 228) Table S6. Predictive plasma HGF at baseline among VAN and E arms in the NSCLC phase III study Subgroup Randomized treatment N Number of events (%) Hazard Ratio 95% CI Positive Vandetanib 300 mg Erlotinib 150 mg 99 93 93 (93.9) 88 (94.6) 1.11 (0.82, 1.49) Negative 96 97 88 (91.7) 86 (88.7) 0.87 (0.63, 1.20) Unknown 428 427 371 (86.7) 371 (86.9) 0.95 (0.82, 1.10) Known 195 190 181 (92.8) 174 (91.6) 0.98 (0.79, 1.21) Cascone, Supplementary Table 5&6