Search

PURPOSE: Guidelines advocate molecular profiling in the evaluation of advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and support the use of plasma circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA)-based profiling for patients with insufficient tissue. Thorough prospective clinical validation studies of next-generation sequencing (NGS)-based ctDNA assays are lacking. We report the multicentered prospective clinical validation of the InVision ctDNA assay in patients with advanced untreated NSCLC. METHODS: A total of 264 patients with untreated advanced NSCLC were prospectively recruited, and their plasma was analyzed using a ctDNA NGS assay for detection of genomic alterations in 36 commonly mutated genes. Tumor tissue was available in 178 patients for molecular profiling for comparison with plasma profiling. The remaining 86 patients were included to compare ctDNA profiles in patients with and without tissue for profiling. RESULTS: Concordance of InVisionFirst with matched tissue profiling was 97.8%, with 82.9% positive predictive value, 98.5% negative predictive value, 70.6% sensitivity, and 99.2% specificity. Considering specific alterations in eight genes that most influence patient management, the positive predictive value was 97.8%, with 97.1% negative predictive value, 73.9% sensitivity, and 99.8% specificity. Across the entire study, 48 patients with actionable alterations were identified by ctDNA testing compared with only 38 by tissue testing. ctDNA NGS reported either an actionable alteration or an alteration generally considered mutually exclusive for such actionable changes in 53% of patients. CONCLUSION: The liquid biopsy NGS assay demonstrated excellent concordance with tissue profiling in this multicenter, prospective, clinical validation study, with sensitivity and specificity equivalent to Food and Drug Administration–approved single-gene ctDNA assays. The use of plasma-based molecular profiling using NGS led to the detection of 26% more actionable alterations compared with standard-of-care tissue testing in this study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose Liquid biopsies represent an attractive alternative to tissue biopsies, particularly rebiopsies, in determining patient eligibility for targeted therapies. Clinical utility of urine genotyping, however, has not been explored extensively. We evaluated epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) T790M detection in matched urine, plasma, and tissue and the clinical outcomes of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer treated with rociletinib. Methods Tissue (n = 540), plasma (n = 482), and urine (n = 213) were collected from evaluable patients enrolled in TIGER-X, a phase I/II study. Genotyping was performed by therascreen EGFR testing in tissue, BEAMing in plasma, and a quantitative short footprint assay (Trovera) in urine, which was used to further examine discordant samples. Results Positive percent agreement with tissue T790M results was similar for urine (82%; 142 of 173) and plasma (81%; 313 of 387) genotyping. Urine and plasma together identified more patients who were T790M positive (92%) than tissue alone (83%) among matched samples (n = 177). The ability to identify mutations in plasma was strongly associated with M stage (P < .001); rate of T790M detection for patients with M1a/M0 disease increased from 54% for plasma alone to 85% when urine and plasma were both examined. Objective response rates of patients who were T790M positive were comparable between tumor (34%), plasma (32%), and urine (37%). Conclusion Clinical response to rociletinib was comparable irrespective of whether T790M status was identified by liquid or tissue biopsy. Combined, urine and plasma identified a higher percentage of patients who were T790M positive than tumor genotyping alone and improved detection of T790M, particularly in the absence of distant metastases. These findings support the noninvasive analysis of urine and plasma before tumor rebiopsy when assessing T790M status. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is a disease in which tumor growth is commonly driven by alterations along the receptor tyrosine kinase-RAS-RAF-mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway. (A) MET-GAB1 proximity ligation assay (PLA) analysis of formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded samples from the HLA-DRB1-MET patient, two different MET exon 14 (ex14) skipping-positive patients, and an ALK rearrangement-positive patient (negative control). 12 Paik PK Drilon A Fan PDet al: Response to MET inhibitors in patients with stage IV lung adenocarcinomas harboring MET mutations causing exon 14 skipping. [Extracted from the article]

The author offers insights on a study about the use of predictive biological markers in determining treatment options for adenocarcinoma of the lung, published by E. H. Bernicker and colleagues within the issue. Topics discussed include the approval of multiplex testing by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), clinical factors that need to be considered in pathological histology, and the interpretation of gene mutations in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Purpose: Newer-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with epidermal growth factor receptor ( EGFR ) mutations and anaplastic lymphoma kinase ( ALK ) rearrangements have demonstrated high CNS activity. The optimal use of up-front stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for brain metastases (BM) in patients eligible for CNS-penetrant TKIs is controversial, and data to guide patient management are limited., Materials and Methods: Data on TKI-naïve patients with EGFR- and ALK-driven NSCLC with BM treated with CNS-penetrant TKIs with and without up-front SRS were retrospectively collected from seven academic centers in the United States. Time-to-CNS progression and overall survival (OS) were analyzed, with multivariable adjustment in Fine & Gray and Cox proportional hazards models for clinically relevant factors., Results: From 2013 to 2022, 317 patients were identified (200 TKI-only and 117 TKI + SRS). Two hundred fifty (79%) and 61 (19%) patients received osimertinib and alectinib, respectively. Patients receiving TKI + SRS were more likely to have BM ≥1 cm ( P < .001) and neurologic symptoms ( P < .001) at presentation. Median OS was similar between the TKI and TKI + SRS groups (median 41 v 40 months, respectively; P = .5). On multivariable analysis, TKI + SRS was associated with a significant improvement in time-to-CNS progression (hazard ratio [HR], 0.63 [95% CI, 0.42 to 0.96]; P = .033). Local CNS control was significantly improved with TKI + SRS (HR, 0.30 [95% CI, 0.16 to 0.55]; P < .001), whereas no significant differences were observed in distant CNS control. Subgroup analyses demonstrated a greater benefit from TKI + SRS in patients with BM ≥1 cm in diameter for time-to-CNS progression and CNS progression-free survival., Conclusion: The addition of up-front SRS to CNS-penetrant TKI improved time-to-CNS progression and local CNS control, but not OS, in patients with BM from EGFR - and ALK-driven NSCLC. Patients with larger BM (≥1 cm) may benefit the most from up-front SRS.

Despite the unmet need, clinical trial opportunities for primary and metastatic central nervous system cancers are limited and clinical trial enrollment is poor. Multiple stakeholders have launched efforts to improve the clinical trial landscape for patients with primary and metastatic central nervous system tumors, including work that promotes the inclusion of patients with brain tumors into clinical trials, re-examination of eligibility criteria, and careful consideration of trial design aspects that may uniquely impact the patients with this disease. Herein, we consider regulatory perspectives from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and clinician-trialist perspectives from a neuro-oncologist and a medical oncologist.

Purpose: Although NRG1 fusions are oncogenic drivers across multiple tumor types including lung cancers, these are difficult to study because of their rarity. The global eNRGy1 registry was thus established to characterize NRG1 fusion-positive lung cancers in the largest and most diverse series to date., Methods: From June 2018 to February 2020, a consortium of 22 centers from nine countries in Europe, Asia, and the United States contributed data from patients with pathologically confirmed NRG1 fusion-positive lung cancers. Profiling included DNA-based and/or RNA-based next-generation sequencing and fluorescence in situ hybridization. Anonymized clinical, pathologic, molecular, and response (RECIST v1.1) data were centrally curated and analyzed., Results: Although the typified never smoking (57%), mucinous adenocarcinoma (57%), and nonmetastatic (71%) phenotype predominated in 110 patients with NRG1 fusion-positive lung cancer, further diversity, including in smoking history (43%) and histology (43% nonmucinous and 6% nonadenocarcinoma), was elucidated. RNA-based testing identified most fusions (74%). Molecularly, six (of 18) novel 5' partners, 20 unique epidermal growth factor domain-inclusive chimeric events, and heterogeneous 5'/3' breakpoints were found. Platinum-doublet and taxane-based (post-platinum-doublet) chemotherapy achieved low objective response rates (ORRs 13% and 14%, respectively) and modest progression-free survival medians (PFS 5.8 and 4.0 months, respectively). Consistent with a low programmed death ligand-1 expressing (28%) and low tumor mutational burden (median: 0.9 mutations/megabase) immunophenotype, the activity of chemoimmunotherapy and single-agent immunotherapy was poor (ORR 0%/PFS 3.3 months and ORR 20%/PFS 3.6 months, respectively). Afatinib achieved an ORR of 25%, not contingent on fusion type, and a 2.8-month median PFS., Conclusion: NRG1 fusion-positive lung cancers were molecularly, pathologically, and clinically more heterogeneous than previously recognized. The activity of cytotoxic, immune, and targeted therapies was disappointing. Further research examining NRG1 -rearranged tumor biology is needed to develop new therapeutic strategies., Competing Interests: Alexander DrilonHonoraria: Medscape, OncLive, PeerVoice, Physicans' Education Resource, Targeted Oncology, MORE Health, Research to Practice, Foundation Medicine, PeerviewConsulting or Advisory Role: Ignyta, Loxo, TP Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Blueprint Medicines, Genentech/Roche, Helsinn Therapeutics, BeiGene, Hengrui Therapeutics, Exelixis, Bayer, Tyra Biosciences, Verastem, Takeda/Millennium, BerGenBio, MORE Health, Lilly, Verastem, AbbVie, 14ner Oncology/Elevation Oncology, Remedica, Archer, Monopteros Therapeutics, Novartis, EMD Serono/Merck, Melendi, Repare TherapeuticsResearch Funding: Foundation MedicinePatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Wolters Kluwer (royalties for Pocket Oncology)Other Relationship: Merck, GlaxoSmithKline, Teva, Taiho Pharmaceutical, Pfizer, PharmaMar, Puma Biotechnology Michael DuruisseauxConsulting or Advisory Role: AstraZeneca, MSD Oncology, BMS, Pfizer, Roche, Takeda, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen Oncology, Amgen, AbbVieTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck Sharp & Dohme Ji-Youn HanHonoraria: Roche, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, TakedaConsulting or Advisory Role: MSD Oncology, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Lilly, Novartis, Takeda, PfizerResearch Funding: Roche, Pfizer, Ono Pharmaceutical, Takeda Soo-Ryum YangConsulting or Advisory Role: Invitae Yonina R. Murciano-GoroffTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: AstraZeneca Morihito OkadaSpeakers' Bureau: Taiho Pharmaceutical, Johnson & Johnson, Covidien, Lilly, Chugai Pharma, AstraZeneca, Ono Pharmaceutical, CSL BehringResearch Funding: Taiho Pharmaceutical, Nippon Kayaku, Chugai Pharma, Covidien, Johnson & Johnson, Daiichi Sankyo, Yakult Honsha, Lilly Japan, Nihon Medi-Physics, Pfizer, Mochida Pharmaceutical Co Ltd, Shionogi, Ono Pharmaceutical, Kyowa Hakko Kirin Miguel Angel MolinaEmployment: Pangaea OncologyResearch Funding: AstraZeneca, Merck Serono, In3Bio Marie WislezConsulting or Advisory Role: Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche, MSD Oncology, Bristol Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, AmgenSpeakers' Bureau: Boehringer Ingelheim, Amgen, Roche, MSD Oncology, Bristol Myers Squibb, AstraZenecaTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Roche, MSD Oncology Alexa SchrockEmployment: Foundation MedicineStock and Other Ownership Interests: Foundation Medicine, Roche Siraj AliEmployment: EQRX (I), Foundation Medicine, EQRXLeadership: Incysus Inc, Elevation Oncology, Pillar BiosciencesStock and Other Ownership Interests: Exelixis, Merus NV, PfizerConsulting or Advisory Role: Azitra (I), Princepx Tx (I)Patents, Royalties, and Other Intellectual Property:Patents via Seres Health on microbiome in non neoplastic disease (I), Foundation Medicine Valérie GounantConsulting or Advisory Role: Bristol Myers Squibb, Takeda, Roche, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, Chugai Pharma EuropeTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Takeda, Roche, Pfizer Alison M. SchramResearch Funding: Merus, Kura Oncology, Surface Oncology, AstraZeneca, Lilly, Northern Biologics, Pfizer, Black Diamond Therapeutics, BeiGene, Relay Therapeutics Isabelle MonnetTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: MSD Oncology, Roche, Takeda, Pfizer Jin-Yuan ShihHonoraria: AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Pfizer, Novartis, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Ono Pharmaceutical, Bristol Myers Squibb, Roche, Chugai Pharma, LillyConsulting or Advisory Role: Chugai Pharma, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Roche, AstraZeneca, Lilly, Takeda, CStone Pharmaceuticals, Janssen Oncology, Novartis, Pfizer, Ono Pharmaceutical, Merck Sharp & DohmeResearch Funding: RocheTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer, Chugai Pharma, Roche Joshua SabariConsulting or Advisory Role: AstraZeneca, Janssen Oncology, Navire, Pfizer, Regeneron, Medscape, Takeda Maurice PérolConsulting or Advisory Role: Lilly, Roche/Genentech, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis, Amgen, Takeda, Chugai Pharma, Gritstone OncologyResearch Funding: AstraZeneca, Roche, Takeda, Boehringer IngelheimTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: AstraZeneca, Roche, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Pfizer, Takeda, Chugai Pharma Viola W. ZhuStock and Other Ownership Interests: TP TherapeuticsHonoraria: AstraZeneca, Roche/Genentech, Takeda, Blueprint Medicines, XcoveryConsulting or Advisory Role: AstraZeneca, Takeda, TP Therapeutics, Roche/Genentech, XcoverySpeakers' Bureau: AstraZeneca, Roche/Genentech, Takeda, Blueprint MedicinesTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: AstraZeneca, Roche/Genentech, Takeda, TP Therapeutics Misako NagasakaConsulting or Advisory Role: AstraZeneca, Caris Life Sciences, Daiichi Sankyo, Takeda, Novartis, EMD SeronoSpeakers' Bureau: Blueprint MedicinesResearch Funding: TempusTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Anheart Therapeutics Robert DoebeleEmployment: Rain TherapeuticsLeadership: Rain TherapeuticsStock and Other Ownership: Rain TherapeuticsConsulting or Advisory Role: GreenPeptide, AstraZeneca, Roche/Genentech, Bayer, Takeda, Rain Therapeutics, Anchiano, Blueprint Medicines, Foundation Medicine, Guardant HealthPatents, Royalties, and Other Intellectual Property: Abbott Molecular for Patent PCT/US2013/057495, Rain Therapeutics, Genentech (Inst), Foundation Medicine (Inst), Black Diamond (Inst), Pearl River (Inst), Voronoi (Inst)Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Rain Therapeutics, Roche/Genentech D. Ross CamidgeHonoraria: Roche, Takeda, AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, Bio-Thera, Ribon Therapeutics, Bristol Myers Squibb, Inivata, AbbVie, Apollomics, Elevation Oncology, EMD Serono, Helsinn Therapeutics, Lilly, Nuvalent Inc, Seattle Genetics, Turning Point Therapeutics, Kestrel Labs, Amgen Astellas BioPharma, Anchiano, Eisai, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, OnKure, Mersana, Pfizer, QiLu Pharmaceutical, SanofiResearch Funding: Takeda Maria ArcilaHonoraria: Invivoscribe, BiocartisConsulting or Advisory Role: AstraZenecaTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: AstraZeneca, Invivoscribe, Raindance Technologies Sai-Hong Ignatius OuStock and Other Ownership Interests: Turning Point Therapeutics, Elevation OncologyHonoraria: Pfizer, Roche Pharma AG, Genentech/Roche, ARIAD/Takeda, AstraZenecaConsulting or Advisory Role: Pfizer, Roche/Genentech, AstraZeneca, Takeda, Jassen/JNJSpeakers' Bureau: AstraZeneca, Genentech/RocheResearch Funding: Pfizer, Roche Pharma AG, AstraZeneca/MedImmune, AstraZeneca, ARIAD, Revolution Medicines, Mirati Therapeutics, Jassen/JNJ Denis Moro-SibilotConsulting or Advisory Role: Roche/Genentech, Boehringer Ingelheim, Lilly/ImClone, Sanofi, Novartis, Amgen, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Clovis Oncology, MSD Oncology, ARIAD, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Takeda, AbbvieResearch Funding: Abbvie (Inst), Boehr (Inst), Roche/Genentech (Inst), Bristol-Myers Squibb (Inst)Expert Testimony: MSD OncologyTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Roche/Genentech, Lilly/ImClone, Pfizer, MSD Oncology, Bristol-Myers Squibb Lucia Anna MuscarellaTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Boehringer Ingelheim Stephen V. LiuConsulting or Advisory Role: Genentech, Pfizer, Lilly, Bristol Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, Takeda, Regeneron, G1 Therapeutics, Guardant Health, Janssen Oncology, MSD Oncology, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Blueprint Medicines, Inivata, PharmaMar, Daiichi Sankyo/UCB Japan, BeiGene, AmgenResearch Funding: Genentech/Roche, Pfizer, Corvus Pharmaceuticals, Bayer, Merck, Lycera, AstraZeneca, Molecular Partners, Blueprint Medicines, Lilly, Rain Therapeutics, Alkermes, Bristol Myers Squibb, Turning Point Therapeutics, RAPT Therapeutics, Merus, Debiopharm Group, Elevation OncologyTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: AstraZeneca, Roche/Genentech, MSD Oncology Jacques CadranelHonoraria: AstraZeneca/MedImmune, Bristol Myers Squibb, Roche/Genentech, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Boehringer IngelheimConsulting or Advisory Role: AstraZeneca/MedImmune, Roche/Genentech, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Takeda, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Pfizer, Lilly, NovartisResearch Funding: Pfizer, Novartis, AstraZeneca/MedImmuneNo other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Purpose Most crizotinib-treated patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase gene ( ALK)-rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer (ALK-positive NSCLC) eventually experience disease progression. We evaluated two regimens of brigatinib, an investigational next-generation ALK inhibitor, in crizotinib-refractory ALK-positive NSCLC. Patients and Methods Patients were stratified by brain metastases and best response to crizotinib. They were randomly assigned (1:1) to oral brigatinib 90 mg once daily (arm A) or 180 mg once daily with a 7-day lead-in at 90 mg (180 mg once daily [with lead-in]; arm B). Investigator-assessed confirmed objective response rate (ORR) was the primary end point. Results Of 222 patients enrolled (arm A: n = 112, 109 treated; arm B: n = 110, 110 treated), 154 (69%) had baseline brain metastases and 164 of 222 (74%) had received prior chemotherapy. With 8.0-month median follow-up, investigator-assessed confirmed ORR was 45% (97.5% CI, 34% to 56%) in arm A and 54% (97.5% CI, 43% to 65%) in arm B. Investigator-assessed median progression-free survival was 9.2 months (95% CI, 7.4 to 15.6) and 12.9 months (95% CI, 11.1 to not reached) in arms A and B, respectively. Independent review committee-assessed intracranial ORR in patients with measurable brain metastases at baseline was 42% (11 of 26 patients) in arm A and 67% (12 of 18 patients) in arm B. Common treatment-emergent adverse events were nausea (arm A/B, 33%/40%), diarrhea (arm A/B, 19%/38%), headache (arm A/B, 28%/27%), and cough (arm A/B, 18%/34%), and were mainly grades 1 to 2. A subset of pulmonary adverse events with early onset (median onset: day 2) occurred in 14 of 219 treated patients (all grades, 6%; grade ≥ 3, 3%); none occurred after escalation to 180 mg in arm B. Seven of 14 patients were successfully retreated with brigatinib. Conclusion Brigatinib yielded substantial whole-body and intracranial responses as well as robust progression-free survival; 180 mg (with lead-in) showed consistently better efficacy than 90 mg, with acceptable safety.

Purpose: Resistance to chemotherapy-induced apoptosis represents a major obstacle to cancer control. Overexpression of Bcl-2 is seen in multiple tumor types and targeting Bcl-2 may provide therapeutic benefit. A phase I study of navitoclax, a novel inhibitor of Bcl-2 family proteins, was conducted to evaluate safety, pharmacokinetics, and preliminary efficacy in patients with solid tumors., Patients and Methods: Patients enrolled to intermittent dosing cohorts received navitoclax on day -3, followed by dosing on days 1 to 14 of a 21-day cycle. Patients on continuous dosing received a 1-week lead-in dose of 150 mg followed by continuous daily administration. Blood samples were collected for pharmacokinetic analyses, biomarker analyses, and platelet monitoring., Results: Forty-seven patients, including 29 with small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) or pulmonary carcinoid, were enrolled between 2007 and 2008, 35 on intermittent and 12 on continuous dosing cohorts. Primary toxicities included diarrhea (40%), nausea (34%), vomiting (36%), and fatigue (34%); most were grade 1 or 2. Dose- and schedule-dependent thrombocytopenia was seen in all patients. One patient with SCLC had a confirmed partial response lasting longer than 2 years, and eight patients with SCLC or carcinoid had stable disease (one remained on study for 13 months). Pro-gastrin releasing peptide (pro-GRP) was identified as a surrogate marker of Bcl-2 amplification and changes correlated with changes in tumor volume., Conclusion: Navitoclax is safe and well tolerated, with dose-dependent thrombocytopenia as the major adverse effect. Preliminary efficacy data are encouraging in SCLC. Efficacy in SCLC and the utility of pro-GRP as a marker of treatment response will be further evaluated in phase II studies.

PURPOSE To evaluate the safety, maximum-tolerated dose (MTD), pharmacokinetics (PKs), pharmacodynamics, and preliminary anticancer activity of ramucirumab (IMC-1121B), a fully human immunoglobulin G(1) monoclonal antibody targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR)-2. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with advanced solid malignancies were treated once weekly with escalating doses of ramucirumab. Blood was sampled for PK studies throughout treatment. The effects of ramucirumab on circulating vascular endothelial growth factor-A (VEGF-A), soluble VEGFR-1 and VEGFR-2, tumor perfusion, and vascularity using dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging were assessed. Results Thirty-seven patients were treated with 2 to 16 mg/kg of ramucirumab. After one patient each developed dose-limiting hypertension and deep venous thrombosis at 16 mg/kg, the next lower dose (13 mg/kg) was considered the MTD. Nausea, vomiting, headache, fatigue, and proteinuria were also noted. Four (15%) of 27 patients with measurable disease had a partial response (PR), and 11 (30%) of 37 patients had either a PR or stable disease lasting at least 6 months. PKs were characterized by dose-dependent elimination and nonlinear exposure consistent with saturable clearance. Mean trough concentrations exceeded biologically relevant target levels throughout treatment at all dose levels. Serum VEGF-A increased 1.5 to 3.5 times above pretreatment values and remained in this range throughout treatment at all dose levels. Tumor perfusion and vascularity decreased in 69% of evaluable patients. CONCLUSION Objective antitumor activity and antiangiogenic effects were observed over a wide range of dose levels, suggesting that ramucirumab may have a favorable therapeutic index in treating malignancies amenable to VEGFR-2 inhibition.

Purpose: A phase I study assessed the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and preliminary antitumor effect of mapatumumab, a fully-human agonist monoclonal antibody to the tumor necrosis factor-related apoptosis-inducing ligand receptor 1 (TRAIL-R1, DR4), in combination with paclitaxel and carboplatin., Patients and Methods: Patients with advanced solid malignancies received 3, 10, or 20 mg/kg of mapatumumab with standard doses of paclitaxel and carboplatin every 21 days for up to six cycles in the absence of disease progression. Additional cycles of paclitaxel and/or mapatumumab were permissible in selected cases., Results: Twenty-seven patients (21 males), with a median age of 54 years, received mapatumumab in the following three cohorts: 3 mg/kg (n = 4), 10 mg/kg (n = 11), and 20 mg/kg (n = 12). The median number of cycles was four. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were grade 3 hypersensitivity reaction (n = 1) and neutropenic fever (n = 1), both at 10 mg/kg. Non-DLT treatment-related adverse events occurring in more than 10% of administered doses included alopecia, neutropenia, fatigue, nausea, anemia, thrombocytopenia, anorexia, and neuropathy. Paclitaxel and carboplatin exposures were similar in the presence or absence of mapatumumab. Plasma mapatumumab concentrations seemed similar to data from previous phase I monotherapy studies. Five patients (19%) achieved a confirmed radiologic partial response (including one pathologic complete response), and 12 patients (44%) had stable disease as their best response., Conclusion: Mapatumumab is well-tolerated up to 20 mg/kg in combination with paclitaxel and carboplatin. There are no apparent pharmacokinetic interactions among the drugs. Preliminary anticancer activity demonstrated clinical benefit for the majority of these patients.