Search

Purpose: To evaluate the addition of ofranergene obadenovec (ofra-vec, VB-111), a novel gene-based anticancer targeted therapy, to once a week paclitaxel in patients with recurrent platinum-resistant ovarian cancer (PROC)., Methods: This placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase III trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03398655) randomly assigned patients with PROC 1:1 to receive intravenous ofra-vec every 8 weeks with once a week IV paclitaxel or placebo with paclitaxel until disease progression. The dual primary end points were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) as assessed by Blinded Independent Central Review., Results: Between December 2017 and March 2022, 409 patients were randomly assigned. The median PFS was 5.29 months in the ofra-vec arm and 5.36 months in the control arm, hazard ratio (HR) 1.03 (CI, 0.83 to 1.29; P = .7823). The median OS with ofra-vec was 13.37 months versus 13.14 months, HR 0.97 (CI, 0.75 to 1.27; P = .8440). Objective response rates (ORRs) per RECIST 1.1 were similar in both arms: 28.9% with ofra-vec versus 29.6% with control. In both treatment arms, response to CA-125 was a substantial prognostic factor for both PFS and OS. In the ofra-vec arm, the HR in CA-125 responders compared with that in nonresponders for PFS was 0.2428 (CI, 0.1642 to 0.3588), and for OS, the HR was 0.3343 (CI, 0.2134 to 0.5238). Safety profile was characterized by common transient flu-like symptoms such as fever and chills., Conclusion: The addition of ofra-vec to paclitaxel did not improve PFS or OS. The PFS and ORR in the control arm exceeded the results that were anticipated on the basis of the AURELIA chemotherapy control arm. CA-125 response was a substantial prognostic biomarker for PFS and OS in patients with PROC treated with paclitaxel.

Purpose: Antiangiogenic therapies are known to cause high radiographic response rates due to reduction in vascular permeability resulting in a lower degree of contrast extravasation. In this study, we investigate the prognostic ability for model-derived parameters describing enhancing tumor volumetric dynamics to predict survival in recurrent glioblastoma treated with antiangiogenic therapy., Experimental Design: N = 276 patients in two phase II trials were used as training data, including bevacizumab ± irinotecan (NCT00345163) and cabozantinib (NCT00704288), and N = 74 patients in the bevacizumab arm of a phase III trial (NCT02511405) were used for validation. Enhancing volumes were estimated using T1 subtraction maps, and a biexponential model was used to estimate regrowth (g) and regression (d) rates, time to tumor regrowth (TTG), and the depth of response (DpR). Response characteristics were compared to diffusion MR phenotypes previously shown to predict survival., Results: Optimized thresholds occurred at g = 0.07 months-1 (phase II: HR = 0.2579, P = 5 × 10-20; phase III: HR = 0.2197, P = 5 × 10-5); d = 0.11 months-1 (HR = 0.3365, P < 0.0001; HR = 0.3675, P = 0.0113); TTG = 3.8 months (HR = 0.2702, P = 6 × 10-17; HR = 0.2061, P = 2 × 10-5); and DpR = 11.3% (HR = 0.6326, P = 0.0028; HR = 0.4785, P = 0.0206). Multivariable Cox regression controlling for age and baseline tumor volume confirmed these factors as significant predictors of survival. Patients with a favorable pretreatment diffusion MRI phenotype had a significantly longer TTG and slower regrowth., Conclusions: Recurrent glioblastoma patients with a large, durable radiographic response to antiangiogenic agents have significantly longer survival. This information is useful for interpreting activity of antiangiogenic agents in recurrent glioblastoma., (©2023 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Objective: Report the results from a preplanned interim analysis of a phase III, double blind, randomized controlled study of ofranergene obadenovec (VB-111), a targeted anti-cancer gene therapy, in combination with paclitaxel in patients with platinum resistant ovarian cancer (PROC)., Methods: The OVAL (NCT03398655) study is an on-going study where patients are randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to weekly paclitaxel 80 mg/m 2 with VB-111 or placebo. The protocol specifies a pre-planned unblinded futility interim analysis of CA-125 response per GCIG criteria in the first 60 evaluable patients. The futility rule determined for this analysis was that the response rate of VB-111 must be greater than the response rate of placebo by at least 10% in order to continue the study. Coincident with the interim analysis, the blinded CA-125 response rate was estimated as a proportion of the first 60 evaluable patients with CA-125 response per GCIG criteria. Post-treatment fever is provided as a possible surrogate marker of VB-111 therapy activity., Results: The median age of the evaluable patients was 62 years (range 41-82); 97% had high-grade serous cancer; 58% had been treated with 3 or more previous lines of therapy, 70% received prior anti-angiogenic treatment, 43% received prior PARP inhibitors. CA-125 response in the VB-111 and weekly paclitaxel treated arm met the pre-specified interim criterion of an absolute advantage of 10% or higher compared to the control. Blinded results show a 53% CA-125 response rate (32/60) with 15% complete response (n=9). Assuming balanced randomization and an absolute advantage of 10% or higher to the VB-111 arm, it may be deducted that the response in the VB-111 treatment arm is 58% or higher. Among patients with post-treatment fever, the CA-125 response rate was 69%., Conclusions: At the time of the interim analysis, response rate findings are comparable to the responses seen in a similar patient population in the phase I/II study. The independent data and safety monitoring committee (iDSMC) recommended continuing the OVAL trial as planned. No new safety signals were identified., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Report final results of a phase I/II study of VB-111, a targeted anti-cancer gene therapy with a dual mechanism: anti angiogenic/vascular disruption and induction of an anti-tumor directed immune response, in combination with paclitaxel in patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer., Methods: Study NCT01711970 was a prospective, open label, dose escalation study assessing combination treatment of VB-111 and weekly paclitaxel. In the Phase I part of the study, patients were treated with escalating doses of intravenous VB-111 and paclitaxel. In Phase 2, patients were treated with therapeutic doses of VB-111 and paclitaxel 80 mg/m 2 . Assessments included safety, overall survival (OS), progression free survival (PFS), and tumor response (CA-125 and RECIST)., Results: 21 patients with recurrent platinum-resistant ovarian cancer were enrolled. 17/21 received the therapeutic dose. Patients had a median of 3 prior lines of therapy. Half of the subjects were platinum refractory, and half were previously treated with antiangiogenics. No DLTs were observed. VB-111 was well tolerated and associated with mild flu-like symptoms. In the therapeutic dose cohort, a 58% CA-125 GCIG response rate was seen in evaluable patients. The median OS was 16.6 months in patients treated with therapeutic dose compared to 5.8 months in sub-therapeutic dose (p = 0.028). Tumor specimens taken after treatment demonstrated tumor infiltrated with cytotoxic CD8 T-cells in regions of apoptotic cancer cells., Conclusions: Treatment with VB-111 in combination with paclitaxel was safe and well tolerated. Favorable tumor responses and overall survival outcomes were associated with induction of an immunotherapeutic effect., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest HB, SB, SC, MF, and JW have no conflicts of interest to disclose. RA has financial activities with CLOVIS, TESARO, AstraZeneca and VBL Therapeutics. MB is on the Data Safety and Monitoring Board for VBL Therapeutics. YC and TRM report personal fees during the conduct of the study and have a patent Methods of Anti-Tumor Therapy pending. RP reported grants and personal fees from VBL during the conduct of the study. DH is CEO of VBL., (Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Ofranergene obadenovec (VB-111) is an anticancer viral therapy that demonstrated in a phase II study a survival benefit for patients with recurrent glioblastoma (rGBM) who were primed with VB-111 monotherapy that was continued after progression with concomitant bevacizumab., Methods: This pivotal phase III randomized, controlled trial compared the efficacy and safety of upfront combination of VB-111 and bevacizumab versus bevacizumab monotherapy. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive VB-111 1013 viral particles every 8 weeks in combination with bevacizumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks (combination arm) or bevacizumab monotherapy (control arm). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), and secondary endpoints were objective response rate (ORR) by Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) criteria and progression-free survival (PFS)., Results: Enrolled were 256 patients at 57 sites. Median exposure to VB-111 was 4 months. The study did not meet its primary or secondary goals. Median OS was 6.8 versus 7.9 months in the combination versus control arm (hazard ratio, 1.20; 95% CI: 0.91-1.59; P = 0.19) and ORR was 27.3% versus 21.9% (P = 0.26). A higher rate of grades 3-5 adverse events was reported in the combination arm (67% vs 40%), mainly attributed to a higher rate of CNS and flu-like/fever events. Trends for improved survival with combination treatment were seen in the subgroup of patients with smaller tumors and in patients who had a posttreatment febrile reaction., Conclusions: In this study, upfront concomitant administration of VB-111 and bevacizumab failed to improve outcomes in rGBM. Change of treatment regimen, with the lack of VB-111 monotherapy priming, may explain the differences from the favorable phase II results., Clinical Trials Registration: NCT02511405., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Neuro-Oncology.)

Background: VB-111 is a non-replicating adenovirus carrying a Fas-chimera transgene, leading to targeted apoptosis of tumor vascular endothelium and induction of a tumor-specific immune response. This phase I/II study evaluated the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of VB-111 with and without bevacizumab in recurrent glioblastoma (rGBM)., Methods: Patients with rGBM (n = 72) received VB-111 in 4 treatment groups: subtherapeutic (VB-111 dose escalation), limited exposure (LE; VB-111 monotherapy until progression), primed combination (VB-111 monotherapy continued upon progression with combination of bevacizumab), and unprimed combination (upfront combination of VB-111 and bevacizumab). The primary endpoint was median overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints were safety, overall response rate, and progression-free survival (PFS)., Results: VB-111 was well tolerated. The most common adverse event was transient mild-moderate fever. Median OS time was significantly longer in the primed combination group compared with both LE (414 vs 223 days; hazard ratio [HR], 0.48; P = 0.043) and unprimed combination (414 vs 141.5 days; HR, 0.24; P = 0.0056). Patients in the combination phase of the primed combination group had a median PFS time of 90 days compared with 60 in the LE group (HR, 0.36; P = 0.032), and 63 in the unprimed combination group (P = 0.72). Radiographic responders to VB-111 exhibited characteristic, expansive areas of necrosis in the areas of initial enhancing disease., Conclusions: Patients with rGBM who were primed with VB-111 monotherapy that continued after progression with the addition of bevacizumab showed significant survival and PFS advantage, as well as specific imaging characteristics related to VB-111 mechanism of action. These results warrant further assessment in a randomized controlled study., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Neuro-Oncology.)