Author: RR

Proton Based Chemoradiotherapy Significantly Decreases Toxicities without Compromising Efficacy

RR

SUMMARY: Radiation Therapy involves the use of X-Rays, Gamma rays and charged particles for cancer treatment. External Beam Radiation Therapy (EBRT) is most often delivered using a linear accelerator in the form of Photon beams (either X-rays or Gamma rays). Photons have no mass and are packets of energy of an electromagnetic wave. Electrons and Protons are charged particles and Electrons are considered light particles whereas Protons are considered heavy particles. Electron beams are used to irradiate skin and superficial tumors, as they are unable to penetrate deep into the tissues. The different types of External Beam Radiation Treatments include 3-Dimensional Conformal Radiation Therapy (3D-CRT) meant to deliver radiation to very precisely shaped target areas, IMRT or Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy which allows different areas of a tumor or nearby tissues to receive different doses of radiation, Image Guided Radiation Therapy (IGRT) which allows reduction in the planned volume of tissue to be treated, as changes in a tumor size are noted during treatment, Stereotactic RadioSurgery (SRS) which can deliver one or more high doses of radiation to a small tumor and Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) or CYBERKNIFE® which is similar to SRS but also takes the normal motion of the body into account while treating malignancies involving the lung and liver.

Proton beams unlike Photons, enter the skin and travel through the tissues and deposit much of their energy at the end of their path (known as the Bragg peak), and deposit less energy along the way. This is unlike Photons which deposit energy all along the path through the tissues and the deposited dose decreases with increasing depth. As a result, with Proton beam therapy, normal tissues are exposed to less radiation compared with Photons. Despite this advantage, tissue heterogeneity such as organ motion, tumor volume changes during treatment can have a significant negative impact on target coverage for Proton beam therapy and can result in damage to the surrounding tissues and potential complications. It is well established that there is significant benefit for Proton beam therapy in certain pediatric malignancies.Types-of-Radiation-Therapy

Curative treatment with concurrent chemoradiotherapy is the standard of care for many nonmetastatic, locally advanced cancers. This treatment modality however is associated with substantial morbidity. Proton therapy as component of concurrent chemoradiotherapy might be able to reduce treatment related toxicity and achieve comparable cancer control outcomes, compared with conventional Photon radiotherapy, by reducing the radiation dose to normal tissues. There are however limited data comparing results of Proton chemoradiotherapy with Photon chemoradiotherapy, and Proton therapy remains unproven in this treatment setting. The objective of this study was to assess whether Proton therapy in the setting of concurrent chemoradiotherapy is associated with fewer hospitalizations or other adverse events and similar Disease-free and Overall Survival, compared with concurrent Photon chemoradiotherapy.

In this large single-institution, nonrandomized, comparative effectiveness, retrospective analysis, 1483 adult patients with nonmetastatic, locally advanced cancer, treated with concurrent chemoradiotherapy with curative intent were included. Three hundred ninety-one patients (N=391) received Proton therapy and 1092 patients received Photon therapy. Common tumor sites included head and neck, lung, brain, esophagus/gastric, rectum, and pancreas. The median patient age was 62 years, but patients treated with Protons were significantly older with a median age of 66 years versus 61 years, had less favorable Charlson-Deyo comorbidity scores and had lower integral radiation dose to tissues outside the target. Ninety three percent (93%) of patients in the Photon therapy group were treated with Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy (IMRT). Baseline ECOG Performance Status was similar between the two treatment cohorts. The Primary end point was 90-day adverse events associated with unplanned hospitalizations (CTCAE version 4 – Grade 3 or more). Secondary end points included ECOG performance status decline during treatment, 90-day adverse events of at least Grade 2 that limit instrumental activities of daily living, and Disease-Free and Overall Survival. The data on adverse events and survival were gathered prospectively.

It was noted that Proton chemoradiotherapy was associated with a significantly lower relative risk of 90-day adverse events of at least Grade 3 (P=0.002), significantly lower relative risk of 90-day adverse events of at least Grade 2 (P=0.006), and decline in Performance Status during treatment (P<0.001). Proton chemoradiotherapy was associated with a two-thirds reduction in adverse events associated with unplanned hospitalizations. At a median follow up of 3.7 years for the Proton cohort and 4.2 years for the Photon cohort, there was no difference in Disease-Free or Overall Survival.

It was concluded from this analysis that in adults with locally advanced cancer, Proton chemoradiotherapy was associated with significantly reduced acute adverse events that caused unplanned hospitalizations, with similar Disease-Free and Overall Survival, compared to Photon therapy.
Comparative Effectiveness of Proton vs Photon Therapy as Part of Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy for Locally Advanced Cancer. Baumann BC, Mitra N, Harton JG, et al. Jama Oncol. 2020;6:237-246.

FDA Approves ZEJULA® for Newly Diagnosed Patients with Advanced Ovarian Cancer

RR

SUMMARY: The FDA on April 29, 2020 approved ZEJULA® (Niraparib) for the maintenance treatment of adult patients with advanced epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer, who are in a complete or partial response to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. It is estimated that in the United States, approximately 21,750 women will be diagnosed with ovarian cancer in 2020 and 13,940 women will die of the disease. Ovarian cancer ranks fifth in cancer deaths among women, and accounts for more deaths than any other cancer of the female reproductive system. Approximately 75% of the ovarian cancer patients are diagnosed with advanced disease. Patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer are often treated with platinum based chemotherapy following primary surgical cytoreduction. Approximately 70% of these patients will relapse within the subsequent 3 years and are incurable, with a 5 year Overall Survival rate of about 20-30%.MOA-of-PARP-Inhibitors

DNA damage is a common occurrence in daily life by UV light, ionizing radiation, replication errors, chemical agents, etc. This can result in single and double strand breaks in the DNA structure which must be repaired for cell survival. The two vital pathways for DNA repair in a normal cell are BRCA1/BRCA2 and PARP. The PARP (Poly ADP Ribose Polymerase) family of enzymes, include PARP1 and PARP2. In the context of DNA repair, BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes recognize and repair double strand DNA breaks via Homologous Recombination (HR) pathway. Homologous Recombination is a type of genetic recombination, and is a DNA repair pathway utilized by cells to accurately repair DNA double-stranded breaks during the S and G2 phases of the cell cycle, and thereby maintain genomic integrity. Homologous Recombination Deficiency (HRD) is noted following mutation of genes involved in HR repair pathway. At least 15 genes are involved in the Homologous Recombination Repair (HRR) pathway including BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. The BRCA1 gene is located on the long (q) arm of chromosome 17 whereas BRCA2 is located on the long arm of chromosome 13. BRCA1 and BRCA2 are tumor suppressor genes and functional BRCA proteins repair damaged DNA, and play an important role in maintaining cellular genetic integrity. They regulate cell growth and prevent abnormal cell division and development of malignancy. Mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 account for about 20-25% of hereditary breast cancers and about 5-10% of all breast cancers. They also account for 15% of ovarian cancers, in addition to other cancers such as Colon and Prostate. BRCA mutations can either be inherited (Germline) and present in all individual cells or can be acquired and occur exclusively in the tumor cells (Somatic). Somatic mutations account for a significant portion of overall BRCA1 and BRCA2 aberrations. Loss of BRCA function due to frequent somatic aberrations likely deregulates HR pathway, and other pathways then come in to play, which are less precise and error prone, resulting in the accumulation of additional mutations and chromosomal instability in the cell, with subsequent malignant transformation. HRD therefore indicates an important loss of DNA repair function. Hereditary Epithelial Ovarian Cancer was thought to be caused almost exclusively by mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2. It however is now well known that about 50% of the high grade serous ovarian cancers have aberrations in HR repair pathway. Deregulated HR pathway increases sensitivity to platinum drugs. Majority of the women with germline BRCA mutations (gBRCA) are positive for HR deficiency.

PARP is a related enzymatic pathway that repairs single strand breaks in DNA. In a BRCA mutant, the cancer cell relies solely on PARP pathway for DNA repair. In the presence of a PARP inhibitor, there is synthetic lethality because loss of both genes, leading to cell death. Thus PARP inhibitors are only harmful to cancer cells. ZEJULA® is a highly selective PARP 1/2 inhibitor, that causes cumulative DNA damage and cell death by inhibiting PARP. Previously published phase III study among patients with platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian cancer (NEJM 2016;375:2154-2164) concluded that Niraparib significantly prolonged Progression Free Survival (PFS) compared to placebo, and this benefit was achieved regardless of the presence or absence of germline BRCA mutations or HRD status.

PRIMA trial is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, international Phase III trial conducted to test the efficacy and safety of ZEJULA® maintenance therapy after a response to platinum-based chemotherapy, in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer at high risk for relapse. It should be noted that at the time PRIMA trial was designed, AVASTIN® (Bevacizumab) was not approved for first-line treatment in all participating countries. A total of 733 patients with newly diagnosed, high risk, advanced ovarian cancer were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive ZEJULA® (N=487) or placebo (N=246) once daily in 28-day cycles for 36 months or until disease progression, after a response to platinum-based chemotherapy regimen. Patients received a dose of 200-300mg once daily, based on body weight and platelet count. Enrolled patients were at high risk for progressive disease with 23.1% having Stage III ovarian cancer with residual disease after primary debulking surgery, 66.7% had received neoadjuvant chemotherapy, 35% had Stage IV ovarian cancer, and 30.5% had a Partial Response to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. Tumor samples were tested for HRD status and HRD was defined by either presence of tumor BRCA mutation or Genomic Instability Score (GIS) of 42 or more. Of the randomized patients, 50.9% had tumors with HRD, 30.4% had BRCA mutations and 20.5% were BRCA wild type. The treatment groups were well balanced. The Primary endpoint was Progression Free Survival (PFS) in patients who had tumors with HRD, and then in the overall population, as determined on hierarchical testing. Secondary end points included Overall Survival, time until the first subsequent therapy, PFS 2, defined as time from randomization to progression while the patient was receiving a subsequent anticancer therapy and Patient-Reported Outcomes. The median duration of follow-up at the time of the data cutoff was 13.8 months.

There was a statistically significant improvement in PFS for patients randomized to ZEJULA® compared with placebo in the HRD group, as well as the overall population. The median PFS in the HRD group was 21.9 months for patients receiving ZEJULA® compared with 10.4 months for those receiving placebo (HR=0.43; P<0.001). The median PFS in the overall population was 13.8 months for patients receiving ZEJULA® compared with 8.2 months for those receiving placebo (HR=0.62; P<0.001). At the 24-month interim analysis, the rate of Overall Survival was 84% in the ZEJULA® group and 77% in the placebo group (HR=0.70). The most common adverse reactions in patients receiving ZEJULA® were cytopenias, fatigue, AST/ALT elevation, hypertension, low grade nausea and decreased appetite.

It was concluded that among patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer who had responded to platinum-based chemotherapy, ZEJULA® significantly prolonged Progression Free Survival, compared to those who received placebo, regardless of the presence or absence of Homologous Recombination Deficiency.
Niraparib in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Advanced Ovarian Cancer. González-Martín A, Pothuri B, Vergote I, et al. for the PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 Investigators. N Engl J Med 2019; 381:2391-2402

FDA Approves Subcutaneous DARZALEX® in Multiple Myeloma

RR

SUMMARY: The FDA on May 1, 2020 approved DARZALEX® (Daratumumab) and Hyaluronidase-fihj (DARZALEX FASPRO®), for adult patients with newly diagnosed or Relapsed/Refractory multiple myeloma. This new product allows for subcutaneous dosing of DARZALEX®.

DARZALEX FASPRO® is now approved for these previously approved indications for IV DARZALEX®
1) In combination with VELCADE® (Bortezomib), Melphalan and Prednisone in newly diagnosed patients who are ineligible for Autologous Stem Cell Transplant (ASCT)
2) In combination with REVLIMID® (Lenalidomide) and Dexamethasone in newly diagnosed patients, who are ineligible for ASCT and in patients with Relapsed or Refractory multiple myeloma who have received at least one prior therapy
3) In combination with VELCADE® and Dexamethasone in patients who have received at least one prior therapy
4) As monotherapy, in patients who have received at least three prior lines of therapy including a Proteasome Inhibitor (PI) and an Immunomodulatory agent or who are double-refractory to a PI and an immunomodulatory agent.

DARZALEX® is a human IgG1 antibody that targets CD38, a transmembrane glycoprotein abundantly expressed on malignant plasma cells and with low levels of expression on normal lymphoid and myeloid cells. DARZALEX® exerts its cytotoxic effect on myeloma cells by multiple mechanisms, including Antibody Dependent Cellular Cytotoxicity (ADCC), Complement Dependent Cytotoxicity (CDC) and direct Apoptosis. Additionally, DARZALEX® may play a role in immunomodulation, by depleting CD38-positive regulator immune suppressor cells, and thereby expanding T cells, in patients responding to therapy.Mechanism-of-Action-of-Daratumumab

This FDA approval is based on COLUMBA Trial, which is a randomized, open-label, multicenter Phase III study, which included 522 patients with multiple myeloma, who had received at least three prior lines of therapy including a Proteasome Inhibitor (PI) and an immunomodulatory drug (IMiD), or whose disease was refractory to both a PI and an IMiD. Patients were randomly assigned to receive a fixed dose of subcutaneously (SC) administered formulation of DARZALEX® 1800 mg weekly for cycles 1-2, every two weeks for cycles 3-6 and every four weeks for cycle 7 and thereafter (N=263), with the subcutaneous preparation given over 3-5 minutes at alternating left and right abdominal sites. In the intravenous group, patients received DARZALEX® 16 mg/kg IV weekly for cycles 1-2, every two weeks for cycles 3-6 and every four weeks for cycle 7 and thereafter (N=259). Each cycle was 28 days. Treatment in both patient groups was continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The median age was 67 years and the median number of prior therapies was four in each treatment group. Patient characteristics were similar between the two arms except that more patients in the subcutaneous arm had high-risk cytogenetics (26%) compared with the intravenous group (17%). The median duration of treatment was approximately 5 months, with a median of 6 completed cycles of treatment. The median duration of infusion was consistently 5 minutes at each visit in the subcutaneous group. However, in the IV arm, the first infusion lasted 7 hours, the second infusion was 4.3 hours, and subsequent infusions lasted a median of 3.4 hours. The study co-Primary endpoints were Overall Response Rate (ORR) and pharmacokinetic endpoint of the maximum C-trough on cycle 3, day 1 pre-dose.

At a median follow up of 7.5 months, the ORR was 41% for the subcutaneous administered formulation of DARZALEX® compared to 37% for IV DARZALEX® (P<0.0001). The ORR was similar across all clinically relevant subgroups, including body weight. The ratio of geometric means of C-trough for the SC administered formulation of DARZALEX® over IV DARZALEX® was 108%. The Progression Free Survival was comparable between the SC administered formulation of DARZALEX and the current IV formulation of DARZALEX (HR=0.99; P<0.9258). A lower rate of infusion-related reactions was observed in the group that received the SC DARZALEX® compared to IV DARZALEX® (13% vs. 35%, respectively).

It was concluded that the subcutaneous formulation of DARZALEX® resulted in non-inferior pharmacokinetics and efficacy compared to the current IV formulation, and also importantly offers the potential for a fixed-dose administration, shorter administration times and a lower rate of infusion-related reactions with improved safety profile, in patients with Relapsed or Refractory multiple myeloma.

Subcutaneous versus intravenous daratumumab in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (COLUMBA): a multicentre, open-label, non-inferiority, randomised, phase 3 trial. Mateos M-V, Nahi H, Legiec W, et al. The Lancet Haematology. Published: March 23, 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S2352-3026(20)30070-3.

ZEJULA® (Niraparib)

RR

The FDA on April 29, 2020 approved ZEJULA® for the maintenance treatment of adult patients with advanced epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer who are in a Complete or Partial Response to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. ZEJULA® is a product of GlaxoSmithKline.

FDA Approves TRODELVY® for Advanced Triple Negative Breast Cancer

RR

SUMMARY: The FDA on April 22, 2020, granted accelerated approval to TRODELVY® (Sacituzumab govitecan-hziy), for adult patients with metastatic Triple-Negative Breast Cancer (TNBC), who received at least two prior therapies for metastatic disease. Breast cancer is the most common cancer among women in the US and about 1 in 8 women (13%) will develop invasive breast cancer during their lifetime. Approximately 276,480 new cases of invasive female breast cancer will be diagnosed in 2020 and about 42,170 women will die of the disease.

Triple Negative Breast Cancer (TNBC) is a heterogeneous, molecularly diverse group of breast cancers and are ER (Estrogen Receptor), PR (Progesterone Receptor) and HER2 (Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor-2) negative. TNBC accounts for 15-20% of invasive breast cancers, with a higher incidence noted in young patients and African American females. It is usually aggressive, and tumors tend to be high grade, and patients with TNBC are at a higher risk of both local and distant recurrence and often develop visceral metastases. Those with metastatic disease have one of the worst prognoses of all cancers with a median Overall Survival of 13 months. The majority of patients with TNBC who develop metastatic disease do so within the first 3 years after diagnosis, whereas those without recurrence during this period of time have survival rates similar to those with ER-positive breast cancers. The lack of known recurrent oncogenic drivers in patients with metastatic TNBC, presents a major therapeutic challenge. Overall survival among patients with pretreated metastatic TNBC has not changed over the past 2 decades and standard chemotherapy is associated with low response rates of 10-15% and a Progression Free Survival of only 2-3 months.

TRODELVY® is an Antibody-Drug Conjugate (ADC) in which SN-38, an active metabolite of Irinotecan, a Topoisomerase I inhibitor, is coupled to the humanized Anti-Trophoblast cell-surface antigen 2 (Trop-2) monoclonal antibody (hRS7 IgG1κ), through the cleavable CL2A linker. SN-38 cannot be given directly to patients because of its toxicity and poor solubility. Trop-2, a transmembrane calcium signal transducer, stimulates cancer-cell growth, and this cell surface receptor is overexpressed in several epithelial cancers including cancers of the breast, colon and lung, and has limited expression in normal human tissues. Trop-2 is expressed in more than 85% of breast tumors including Triple Negative Breast Cancer. Upon binding to Trop-2, the anti-TROP-2 monoclonal antibody is internalized and delivers SN-38 directly into the tumor cell, making it a suitable transporter for the delivery of cytotoxic drugs. Further, the cleavable linker enables SN-38 to be released both intracellularly into the tumor cells as well as the tumor microenvironment, thereby allowing for the delivery of therapeutic concentrations of the active drug in bystander cells to which the conjugate has not bound. Thus, TRODELVY®-bound tumor cells are killed by intracellular uptake of SN-38, whereas the adjacent tumor cells are killed by the extracellular release of SN-38.

IMMU-132-01 is a Phase I/II, basket design, open-label, single-group, multicenter trial involving patients with various types of advanced epithelial cancers, who have received at least one previous therapy for metastatic disease. (One example of a basket design is a single drug evaluated in multiple baskets, with each basket representing a different malignancy or tumor site with the same target). A total of 108 patients with metastatic Triple-Negative Breast Cancer (TNBC) were enrolled between June 2013 and February 2017. Patients received TRODELVY® 10 mg/kg IV on days 1 and 8 every 21 days. Tumor imaging was obtained every 8 weeks, and patients were treated until disease progression or intolerance to therapy. The median patient age was 55 years. Enrolled patients had a median of 3 prior anticancer regimens and 98% had received taxanes and 86% had received anthracyclines. The Primary efficacy end point was the Objective Response Rate (ORR). Other efficacy end points included Time to Response and Duration of Response in patients who had a response, the Clinical Benefit Rate (defined as a Complete or Partial Response or stable disease for at least 6 months), Progression Free and Overall Survival. The median duration of follow up for this basket of 108 patients with metastatic TNBC was 9.7 months.

The Objective Response Rate was 33.3% including a Complete Response Rate of 2.8%. The median Time to Response was 2.0 months and the median Duration of Response was 7.7 months. The Clinical Benefit Rate was 45.4%. There was no meaningful difference in response rates in the various patient subgroups including patient age, onset of metastatic disease, number of previous therapies and the presence or absence of visceral metastases. The median PFS was 5.5 months and median OS was 13.0 months. The most common adverse reactions were, possibly severe neutropenia and diarrhea, fatigue, nausea, vomiting, alopecia and abdominal discomfort.

It was concluded that TRODELVY® was associated with durable Objective Responses in patients with heavily pretreated metastatic Triple Negative Breast Cancer. This unique Antibody Drug Conjugate may be of potential benefit for other Trop-2 expressing advanced epithelial solid tumors.
Sacituzumab Govitecan-hziy in Refractory Metastatic Triple-Negative Breast Cancer. Bardia A, Mayer IA, Vahdat LT, et al. N Engl J Med. 2019;380:741-751.

ELIQUIS® May Be Safer for the Treatment of Venous Thromboembolism Associated with Cancer

RR

SUMMARY: The Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that approximately 1-2 per 1000 individuals develop Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT)/Pulmonary Embolism (PE) each year in the United States, resulting in 60,000-100,000 deaths. Venous ThromboEmbolism (VTE) is the third leading cause of cardiovascular mortality, after myocardial infarction and stroke. Ambulatory cancer patients initiating chemotherapy are at varying risk for Venous Thromboembolism (VTE), which in turn can have a substantial effect on health care costs, with negative impact on quality of life.

Approximately 20% of cancer patients develop VTE and there is a two-fold increase in the risk of recurrent thrombosis in patients with cancer, compared with those without cancer. The high risk of recurrent VTE, as well as bleeding in this patient group, makes anticoagulant treatment challenging. Treatment with parenteral Low Molecular Weight Heparin (LMWH) preparations is often recommended for this patient group, based on efficacy data. LMWH accelerates the inhibition by Antithrombin of activated Factor X, in the conversion of Prothrombin to Thrombin. Parenteral LMWH however can be inconvenient and expensive, leading to premature discontinuation of treatment.Anticoagulants

Direct Oral Anticoagulant agents have been proven to be as effective as COUMADIN® (Warfarin), a Vitamin K antagonist, for the treatment of VTE, and are associated with less frequent and less severe bleeding, and fewer drug interactions. The Direct Oral AntiCoagulants (DOACs) include PRADAXA® (Dabigatran), which is a direct Thrombin inhibitor and XARELTO® (Rivaroxaban), ELIQUIS® (Apixaban), SAVAYSA® (Edoxaban), BEVYXXA® (Betrixaban), which are Factor Xa inhibitors. Compared to COUMADIN®, the New Oral Anticoagulants have a rapid onset of action, wider therapeutic window, shorter half-lives (7-14 hours in healthy individuals), require no laboratory monitoring and have a fixed dosing schedule.

Three open-label, randomized, controlled trials have compared direct Factor Xa inhibitors with subcutaneous LMWH FRAGMIN® (Dalteparin). In the Hokusai VTE Cancer noninferiority trial, SAVAYSA® (Edoxaban)‎ when compared with FRAGMIN® was associated with a lower rate of recurrent VTE, but this was offset by a similar increase in the risk of major bleeding. In the SELECT-D trial, XARELTO® was associated with relatively low VTE recurrence in patients with cancer, but with higher clinically relevant non-major bleeding, compared with FRAGMIN®. In the ADAM VTE Trial, oral ELIQUIS® therapy was associated with very low rates of bleeding and significantly lower VTE recurrence compared to parenteral FRAGMIN®. The inconsistent results from these studies have been attributed to patient selection (cancer type, types of cancer therapies and prognosis), duration of treatment, and primary efficacy outcomes of these studies. SAVAYSA® and XARELTO® are often recommended as alternatives to LMWH in patients with cancer, although higher risk of clinically important bleeding has been reported with both these agents, particularly in patients with GI malignancies, including pancreatic cancer.

The Caravaggio trial is a multinational, randomized, open-label, noninferiority trial which was conducted to assess whether oral ELIQUIS® would be noninferior to subcutaneous FRAGMIN® (Dalteparin), a LMWH, for the prevention of recurrent VTE in patients with cancer, without increasing the risk of major bleeding. In this study, 1155 patients with cancer who had symptomatic or incidental acute proximal DVT or PE were randomly assigned to receive ELIQUIS® 10 mg orally twice daily for the first 7 days, followed by 5 mg orally twice daily (N=576) or FRAGMIN® 200 IU/kg administered subcutaneously once daily for the first month, followed by 150 IU/kg subcutaneous once daily (N=579). The demographic and clinical characteristics of the patients in both treatment groups were well balanced and advanced active cancers associated with high thromboembolic risk such as lung and colorectal cancers were well represented. This study included patients receiving a variety of cytotoxic and biologic therapies. Anticoagulant treatments were administered for 6 months. The Primary endpoint was objectively confirmed recurrent VTE during the trial period. The principal safety outcome was major bleeding.

The Primary endpoint of recurrent VTE occurred in 5.6% of patients in the ELIQUIS® group and in 7.9% of patients in the FRAGMIN® group (HR=0.63; P<0.001 for noninferiority). Major bleeding occurred in 3.8% of patients in the ELIQUIS® group and 4.0% of patients in the FRAGMIN® group (HR=0.82; P=0.60). Major GI bleeding occurred in 1.9% of patients in the ELIQUIS® group and in 1.7% of patients in the FRAGMIN® group and major non-gastrointestinal bleeding occurred in 1.9% and 2.2% of patients respectively. There were no fatal bleeding episodes noted in the ELIQUIS® group, whereas 2 patients had a fatal bleed in the FRAGMIN® group. These findings with regards to bleeding are in contrast to the results of previously published studies, which showed a higher incidence of bleeding with other Direct Oral AntiCoagulants, compared with FRAGMIN®, in a similar patient population.

It was concluded that in this study which included patients with predominantly advanced active cancer and acute symptomatic VTE, oral ELIQUIS® was noninferior to subcutaneous FRAGMIN® for the treatment of cancer-associated VTE, without an increased risk of major bleeding. The authors added that these findings may expand the proportion of patients with both cancer and VTE who would be eligible for treatment with ELIQUIS®, including patients with active gastrointestinal malignancies. It should be noted however that LMWH should still be preferred for patients who have undergone surgery involving the upper GI tract, as Direct Oral AntiCoagulants are absorbed in the stomach or proximal small bowel, as well as for those patients with bleeding or thrombocytopenia, recurrent VTE, CNS cancers, or those with severe renal impairment, and in the perioperative setting.
Apixaban for the Treatment of Venous Thromboembolism Associated with Cancer. Agnelli G, Becattini C, Meyer G, et al. for the Caravaggio Investigators. N Engl J Med 2020; 382:1599-1607