Search

Aims: We aim to evaluate change in the use of prognostic guideline-directed medical therapies (GDMTs) for heart failure (HF) before and after a cancer diagnosis as well as the matched non-cancer controls, including renin-angiotensin-system inhibitors (RASIs), beta-blockers, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs)., Methods and Results: We conducted a longitudinal study in patients with HF in the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink between 2005 and 2021. We selected patients with probable HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) based on diagnostic and prescription records. We described the longitudinal trends in the use and dosing of GDMTs before and after receiving an incident cancer diagnosis. HF patients with cancer were matched with a 1:1 ratio to HF patients without cancer to investigate the association between cancer diagnosis and treatment adherence, persistence, initiation, and dose titration as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using multivariable logistic regression models. Of 8504 eligible HFrEF patients with incident cancer, 4890 were matched to controls without cancer. The mean age was 75.7 (±8.4) years and 73.9% were male. In the 12 months following a cancer diagnosis, patients experienced reductions in the use and dosing of GDMT. Compared with the non-cancer controls, patients with cancer had higher risks for poor adherence for all three medication classes (RASIs: OR = 1.51, 95% CI = 1.35-1.68; beta-blockers: OR = 1.22, 95% CI = 1.08-1.37; MRAs: OR = 1.31, 95% CI = 1.08-1.59) and poor persistence (RASIs: OR = 2.04, 95% CI = 1.75-2.37; beta-blockers: OR = 1.35, 95% CI = 1.12-1.63; MRAs: OR = 1.49, 95% CI = 1.16-1.93), and higher risks for dose down-titration for RASIs (OR = 1.69, 95% CI = 1.40-2.04) and beta-blockers (OR = 1.31, 95% CI = 1.05-1.62). Cancer diagnosis was not associated with treatment initiation or dose up-titration. Event rates for HF hospitalization and mortality were higher in patients with poor adherence or persistence to GDMTs., Conclusions: Following a cancer diagnosis, patients with HFrEF were more likely to have reduced use of GDMTs for HF., (© 2024 The Author(s). ESC Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Purpose: A recent observational study suggested statins could reduce cancer diagnosis in patients with heart failure (HF). The findings need to be validated using robust epidemiological methods. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of statin treatment on the risk of cancer in patients with HF., Methods: We conducted two target trial emulations using primary care data from IQVIA Medical Research Database-UK (2000 to 2019) with a clone-censor-weight design. The first emulated trial addressed the treatment initiation effect: initiating within 1 year versus not initiating a statin after the HF diagnosis. The second emulated trial addressed the cumulative exposure effect: continuing a statin for ≤3 years, 3-6 years, and >6 years after initiation. The study outcomes were any incident cancer and site-specific cancer diagnoses. Weighted pooled logistic regression models were used to estimate 10-year risk ratios (RR). 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using non-parametric bootstrapping., Results: The first emulated trial showed that, compared to no statin, statins did not reduce the cancer risk in patients with HF (RR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.94-1.15). The second emulated trial showed that, compared to treatment ≤3 years, statins with longer durations did not reduce the cancer risk (3-6 years: RR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.70-1.33. >6 years: RR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.79-1.26). No significant risk difference was observed on any site-specific cancer diagnoses., Conclusions: The results from the target trial emulations suggest that statin treatment is not associated with cancer risk in patients with HF., (© 2024 The Authors. Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

BACKGROUNDPhase 1 study of ATRinhibition alone or with radiation therapy (PATRIOT) was a first-in-human phase I study of the oral ATR (ataxia telangiectasia and Rad3-related) inhibitor ceralasertib (AZD6738) in advanced solid tumors.METHODSThe primary objective was safety. Secondary objectives included assessment of antitumor responses and pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) studies. Sixty-seven patients received 20-240 mg ceralasertib BD continuously or intermittently (14 of a 28-day cycle).RESULTSIntermittent dosing was better tolerated than continuous, which was associated with dose-limiting hematological toxicity. The recommended phase 2 dose of ceralasertib was 160 mg twice daily for 2 weeks in a 4-weekly cycle. Modulation of target and increased DNA damage were identified in tumor and surrogate PD. There were 5 (8%) confirmed partial responses (PRs) (40-240 mg BD), 34 (52%) stable disease (SD), including 1 unconfirmed PR, and 27 (41%) progressive disease. Durable responses were seen in tumors with loss of AT-rich interactive domain-containing protein 1A (ARID1A) and DNA damage-response defects. Treatment-modulated tumor and systemic immune markers and responding tumors were more immune inflamed than nonresponding.CONCLUSIONCeralasertib monotherapy was tolerated at 160 mg BD intermittently and associated with antitumor activity.TRIAL REGISTRATIONClinicaltrials.gov: NCT02223923, EudraCT: 2013-003994-84.FUNDINGCancer Research UK, AstraZeneca, UK Department of Health (National Institute for Health Research), Rosetrees Trust, Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre.

Radiotherapy has proven efficacy in a wide range of cancers. There is growing interest in evaluating radiotherapy-novel agent combinations and a drive to initiate this earlier in the clinical development of the novel agent, where the scientific rationale and preclinical evidence for a radiotherapy combination approach are high. Optimal design, delivery, and interpretation of studies are essential. In particular, the design of phase I studies to determine safety and dosing is critical to an efficient development strategy. There is significant interest in early-phase research among scientific and clinical communities over recent years, at a time when the scrutiny of the trial methodology has significantly increased. To enhance trial design, optimize safety, and promote efficient trial conduct, this position paper reviews the current phase I trial design landscape. Key design characteristics extracted from 37 methodology papers were used to define a road map and a design selection process for phase I radiotherapy-novel agent trials. Design selection is based on single- or dual-therapy dose escalation, dose-limiting toxicity categorization, maximum tolerated dose determination, subgroup evaluation, software availability, and design performance. Fifteen of the 37 designs were identified as being immediately accessible and relevant to radiotherapy-novel agent phase I trials. Applied examples of using the road map are presented. Developing these studies is intensive, highlighting the need for funding and statistical input early in the trial development to ensure appropriate design and implementation from the outset. The application of this road map will improve the design of phase I radiotherapy-novel agent combination trials, enabling a more efficient development pathway., (©2022 The Authors; Published by the American Association for Cancer Research.)

Purpose/aims: Uptake and delivery of cancer services across the United Kingdom have been significantly impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed to understand the impact of the pandemic on the working practices of clinical nurse specialists and their patient interactions across different cancer specialties., Design: We performed a cross-sectional survey exploring nurses' experiences of delivering care during the pandemic, as well as their perceptions of the concerns that cancer patients were experiencing., Methods: Clinical nurse specialists working in London cancer services were invited to complete an online questionnaire. Nurses' experiences and their perceptions of patients' concerns were analyzed descriptively., Results: Fifty-four nurses participated. Almost half had been redeployed to other clinical areas during the pandemic (n = 19). COVID-19 discussions added 5 to 10 minutes on average to most consultations, with nurses either working longer/unpaid hours (34%) or spending less time talking to patients about cancer (39%) to deal with this. Approximately 50% of nurses would have liked additional information and support from their hospital., Conclusions: Clinical nurse specialist time and resources have been stretched during the COVID-19 pandemic. Hospitals need to work with nursing staff to ensure the specific information needs of cancer patients are being met., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Treatment options for malignant pleural mesothelioma are scarce. Tazemetostat, a selective oral enhancer of zeste homolog 2 (EZH2) inhibitor, has shown antitumour activity in several haematological cancers and solid tumours. We aimed to evaluate the anti-tumour activity and safety of tazemetostat in patients with measurable relapsed or refractory malignant pleural mesothelioma., Methods: We conducted an open-label, single-arm phase 2 study at 16 hospitals in France, the UK, and the USA. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with malignant pleural mesothelioma of any histology that was relapsed or refractory after treatment with at least one pemetrexed-containing regimen, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, and a life expectancy of greater than 3 months. In part 1 of the study, participants received oral tazemetostat 800 mg once on day 1 and then twice daily from day 2 onwards. In part 2, participants received oral tazemetostat 800 mg twice daily starting on day 1 of cycle 1, using a two-stage Green-Dahlberg design. Tazemetostat was administered in 21-day cycles for approximately 17 cycles. The primary endpoint of part 1 was the pharmacokinetics of tazemetostat and its metabolite at day 15 after administration of 800 mg tazemetostat, as measured by maximum serum concentration (C max ), time to C max (T max ), area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) to day 15 (AUC 0-t ), area under the curve from time 0 extrapolated to infinity (AUC 0-∞ ), and the half-life (t 1/2 ) of tazemetostat, assessed in all patients enrolled in part 1. The primary endpoint of part 2 was the disease control rate (the proportion of patients with a complete response, partial response, or stable disease) at week 12 in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma per protocol with BAP1 inactivation determined by immunohistochemistry. The safety population included all the patients who had at least one post-dose safety assessment. This trial is now complete and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02860286., Findings: Between July 29, 2016, and June 2, 2017, 74 patients were enrolled (13 in part 1 and 61 in part 2) and received tazemetostat, 73 (99%) of whom had BAP1-inactivated tumours. In part 1, following repeat dosing of tazemetostat at steady state, on day 15 of cycle 1, the mean C max was 829 ng/mL (coefficient of variation 56·3%), median T max was 2 h (range 1-4), mean AUC 0-t was 3310 h·ng/mL (coefficient of variation 50·4%), mean AUC 0-∞ was 3180 h·ng/mL (46·6%), and the geometric mean t 1/2 was 3·1 h (13·9%). After a median follow-up of 35·9 weeks (IQR 20·6-85·9), the disease control rate in part 2 in patients with BAP1-inactivated malignant pleural mesothelioma was 54% (95% CI 42-67; 33 of 61 patients) at week 12. No patients had a confirmed complete response. Two patients had a confirmed partial response: one had an ongoing partial response with a duration of 18 weeks and the other had a duration of 42 weeks. The most common grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events were hyperglycaemia (five [7%] patients), hyponatraemia (five [7%]), and anaemia (four [5%]); serious adverse events were reported in 25 (34%) of 74 patients. Five (7%) of 74 patients died while on study; no treatment-related deaths occurred., Interpretation: Further refinement of biomarkers for tazemetostat activity in malignant pleural mesothelioma beyond BAP1 inactivation could help identify a subset of tumours that are most likely to derive prolonged benefit or shrinkage from this therapy., Funding: Epizyme., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests MGZ has received support for the present manuscript from Epizyme; grants or contracts to her institution from National Institutes of Health, Department of Defense, Precog, Epizyme, GlaxoSmithKline, Polaris, Sellas Life Sciences, Bristol Myers Squibb, Millennium, Curis, and Atara; consulting fees from Ikena, Takeda, GlaxoSmithKline, Aldeyra Therapeutics, and Novocure; has honoraria from Physicians' Education Resource, Medscape, Research to Practice, Medical Learning Institute, and OncLive; and has served as Chair of the Board of Directors (uncompensated) with Mesothelioma Applied Research Foundation. PWS has received research funding from Polaris Group; has served in an advisory role for Merck, Epizyme, Nestle Health Science, and Paredox Therapeutics; and has received expenses related to travel and accommodation from MSD. SP has received consulting fees from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Beigene, Blueprint, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, Guardant Health, Incyte, Janssen, Lilly, Merck Serono, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Takeda, Pfizer, Seattle Genetics, Turning Point Therapeutics, and Xcovery; honoraria from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Guardant Health, Janssen, Merck Serono, Roche, Takeda, and Pfizer; payment for expert testimony from Roche and Merck Serono; and has a leadership or fiduciary role with British Thoracic Oncology Group, ALK Positive UK, Lung Cancer Europe, Ruth Strauss Foundation, Mesothelioma Applied Research Foundation, and ETOP-IBCSG Partners Foundation Board. DP has received consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Janssen, and AbbVie; honoraria from AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, prIME Oncology, Peer CME, Roche, Janssen, and AbbVie; support for attending meetings or travel from AstraZeneca, Roche, Novartis, and Pfizer; has participated on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for AstraZeneca, Roche, Novartis, and Pfizer; and has participated in clinical trial research as principal or co-investigator (institutional financial interests) with AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Medimmun, Sanofi Aventis, Taiho Pharma, Novocure, Daiichi Sankyo, Janssen, and AbbVie. ASc has received other fees from Epizyme; personal fees from AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Sanofi, Janssen, and MSD; and non-financial support from AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Roche, and MSD. TP has received consulting fees from AstraZeneca. ASz, JY, YC, VK, and SA are employees of or own stock in Epizyme. DAF has received grants from Astex Pharmaceuticals, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Bergen Bio, RS Oncology, and Aldeyra; personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim and Bristol Myers Squibb; and non-financial support from Bristol Myers Squibb, Clovis Oncology, Lilly Oncology, MSD, Bergen Bio, and Roche. PT has received speaker fees from AstraZeneca. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Crown Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background In vitro/in vivo data showed synergism of cisplatin and lurbinectedin in ovarian cancer cells and grafts. This phase I trial investigated the recommended phase II dose (RD) of cisplatin and lurbinectedin combination, with (Group A) or without aprepitant (Group B), in patients with advanced solid tumors. Patients and Methods All patients received 60 mg/m 2 cisplatin 90-min intravenous (i.v.) infusion followed by lurbinectedin 60-min i.v. infusion at escalating doses on Day 1 every 3 weeks (q3wk). Patients in Group A additionally received orally 125 mg aprepitant one hour before cisplatin on Day 1 and 80 mg on Days 2 and 3. Toxicity was graded according to the NCI-CTCAE v.4. Results RD for Group A was cisplatin 60 mg/m 2 plus lurbinectedin 1.1 mg/m 2 . RD for Group B was cisplatin 60 mg/m 2 plus lurbinectedin 1.4 mg/m 2 . The most frequent grade ≥ 3 adverse events were hematological [neutropenia (41%), lymphopenia (35%), leukopenia (24%), thrombocytopenia (18%)] and fatigue (35%) in Group A (n = 17), and neutropenia (50%), leukopenia (42%), lymphopenia (29%), and fatigue (13%) and nausea (8%) in Group B (n = 24). Four patients (2 in each group) had a partial response. Disease stabilization for ≥ 4 months was observed in 4 and 10 patients, respectively. Conclusion The combination of lurbinectedin with cisplatin was not possible in meaningful therapeutic dosage due to toxicity. The addition of aprepitant in combination with cisplatin did not allow increasing the dose due to hematological toxicity, whereas omitting aprepitant increased the incidence of nausea and vomiting. Modest clinical activity was observed in general.Clinical trial registration www.ClinicalTrials.gov code: NCT01980667. Date of registration: 11 November 2013., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Aim: This Phase I study investigated safety of navitoclax and docetaxel in patients (n = 41) with advanced solid tumors. Patients & methods: Two navitoclax plus docetaxel dosing schedules (21 and 28 days) were evaluated. Maximum tolerated dose, dose-limiting toxicities and preliminary antitumor activity were assessed. Results: Ten (24%) patients experienced dose-limiting toxicities; dose-escalation cohorts: n = 7 (21-day schedule: n = 5; 28-day schedule: n = 2) and 21-day expanded safety cohort: n = 3. Navitoclax 150-mg days 1-5 every 21 days with docetaxel 75 mg/m 2  day 1 was the maximum tolerated dose and optimal schedule. Adverse events included thrombocytopenia (63%), fatigue (61%), nausea (59%) and neutropenia (51%). Four confirmed partial responses occurred. Conclusion: Navitoclax 150-mg orally once/day was safely administered with docetaxel. Myelosuppression limited dose escalation; antitumor activity was observed. Clinical trial registration: NCT00888108 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Objectives: To estimate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer care services and overall (direct and indirect) excess deaths in people with cancer., Methods: We employed near real-time weekly data on cancer care to determine the adverse effect of the pandemic on cancer services. We also used these data, together with national death registrations until June 2020 to model deaths, in excess of background (pre-COVID-19) mortality, in people with cancer. Background mortality risks for 24 cancers with and without COVID-19-relevant comorbidities were obtained from population-based primary care cohort (Clinical Practice Research Datalink) on 3 862 012 adults in England., Results: Declines in urgent referrals (median=-70.4%) and chemotherapy attendances (median=-41.5%) to a nadir (lowest point) in the pandemic were observed. By 31 May, these declines have only partially recovered; urgent referrals (median=-44.5%) and chemotherapy attendances (median=-31.2%). There were short-term excess death registrations for cancer (without COVID-19), with peak relative risk (RR) of 1.17 at week ending on 3 April. The peak RR for all-cause deaths was 2.1 from week ending on 17 April. Based on these findings and recent literature, we modelled 40% and 80% of cancer patients being affected by the pandemic in the long-term. At 40% affected, we estimated 1-year total (direct and indirect) excess deaths in people with cancer as between 7165 and 17 910, using RRs of 1.2 and 1.5, respectively, where 78% of excess deaths occured in patients with ≥1 comorbidity., Conclusions: Dramatic reductions were detected in the demand for, and supply of, cancer services which have not fully recovered with lockdown easing. These may contribute, over a 1-year time horizon, to substantial excess mortality among people with cancer and multimorbidity. It is urgent to understand how the recovery of general practitioner, oncology and other hospital services might best mitigate these long-term excess mortality risks., Competing Interests: Competing interests: ML has received honoraria from Pfizer, EMD Serono and Roche for presentations unrelated to this research, and an unrestricted educational grant from Pfizer for research unrelated to the research presented in this paper. AB has received research funding from AstraZeneca. MF has received research funding from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck and MSD and honoraria from Achilles, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Meyers Squibb, Celgene, Guardant Health, Merck, MSD, Nanobiotix, Novartis, Pharmamar, Roche and Takeda for advisory roles or presentations unrelated to this research. GF receives funding from companies that manufacture drugs for hepatitis C virus (AbbVie, Gilead, MSD) and is a consultant for GSK, Arbutus and Shionogi in areas unrelated to this research., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Background: BAL101553 (lisavanbulin), the lysine prodrug of BAL27862 (avanbulin), exhibits broad anti-proliferative activity in human cancer models refractory to clinically relevant microtubule-targeting agents., Methods: This two-part, open-label, phase 1/2a study aimed to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) of 2-h infusion of BAL101553 in adults with advanced or recurrent solid tumours. The MTD was determined using a modified accelerated titration design in phase I. Patients received BAL101553 at the MTD and at lower doses in the phase 2a expansion to characterise safety and efficacy and to determine the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D)., Results: Seventy-three patients received BAL101553 at doses of 15-80 mg/m 2 (phase 1, n = 24; phase 2a, n = 49). The MTD was 60 mg/m 2 ; DLTs observed at doses ≥60 mg/m 2 were reversible Grade 2-3 gait disturbance with Grade 2 peripheral sensory neuropathy. In phase 2a, asymptomatic myocardial injury was observed at doses ≥45 mg/m 2 . The RP2D for 2-h intravenous infusion was 30 mg/m 2 . The overall disease control rate was 26.3% in the efficacy population., Conclusions: The RP2D for 2-h infusion of BAL101553 was well tolerated. Dose-limiting neurological and myocardial side effects were consistent with the agent's vascular-disrupting properties., Clinical Trial Registration: EudraCT: 2010-024237-23.

Background: The development and rapid uptake of immune checkpoint inhibitors (CPI) has changed the outlook for patients with cancer. However, CPIs have different adverse event (AE) profiles to other systemic therapies, and prompt AE management is essential to assure optimal outcomes. In order to understand what and when adverse events are experienced, reported and managed during CPI treatment, a mixed methods study was conducted, including a case note review of patients who were receiving immunotherapy and semi-structured interviews with patients to understand their experience, management and reporting of AEs after receiving immune CPI treatment., Methods: This mixed methods study was conducted at a large cancer hospital in the United Kingdom. A case note review identified how and where patients reported AEs. Data relating to patients with lung, bladder, prostate and head & neck cancers who received CPI treatment between 01/04/2015 and 31/07/2018 were extracted from e-prescribing databases and clinical data were included for analysis at a single time point (31 July 2018). Semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients receiving CPI treatment, exploring experience of AEs and reasons for delays in AE reporting and management., Results: Sixty-two patients were included in the case note review, with 78 AEs being experienced by 36 patients (58%), including one patient experiencing 10 AEs. Serious AEs were experienced by 12 patients (19%) and ten AEs (17%) required oral steroids as treatment. The majority of AEs were reported to clinicians prior to further dosing, although milder AEs were often not addressed until subsequent clinic appointments. Interviews with 13 patients yielded major themes: variability, causality, decision making and impact., Conclusion: Most CPI-associated AEs are manageable if reported and treated promptly. Both the case note review and interviews found that reporting of non-serious AEs is often left until routine clinic visits, despite impacting patient experience, leaving the opportunity for AEs to be left unreported and implying a potential benefit for real time monitoring. Our study highlights a need to provide patients with reminders around AEs and their timely reporting even when apparently innocuous; patients must understand that AEs can occur at any cycle and even following treatment completion.

Background: Neutropenia is associated with an increased risk of mortality and hospitalisation. Strategies, including the prescribing of colony-stimulating growth factors (CSFs), are adopted when a high risk (> 20%) of neutropenic complications are seen in the clinical trial setting. With a diverse treatment population that may differ from the patient groups recruited to studies, appropriate prescribing decisions by clinicians are essential. At present, results are conflicting from studies evaluating the risks of certain patient attributes on neutropenic events; we aimed to aggregate these associations to guide future management., Design: A systematic review with a meta-analysis was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. Studies were identified through a literature search using MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) databases from inception to December 1, 2017. Studies were included into a meta-analysis if they adjusted for confounders; analyses were conducted in STATA v 15.1 SE., Results: A total of 4415 articles were retrieved by the search with 37 meeting the inclusion criteria and 12 eligible for meta-analysis. Meta-analysis was conducted for increasing age and yielded a pooled odds ratio of 1.39 (1.11, 1.76, I 2  = 24.1%), in our subgroup analysis of 4814 patients. Odds ratios for studies were pooled that reported associations for one co-morbidity compared to none and resulted in an overall odds of 1.54 (CI 1.09-2.09, I 2  = 13.1%), including 9189 patients in total., Conclusions: Results can enhance current guidance in prescribing primary prophylaxis for treatments that either fall marginally under the internationally recognised 20% neutropenia risk.

Background: Tisotumab vedotin is a first-in-human antibody-drug conjugate directed against tissue factor, which is expressed across multiple solid tumour types and is associated with poor clinical outcomes. We aimed to establish the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetic profile, and antitumour activity of tisotumab vedotin in a mixed population of patients with locally advanced or metastatic (or both) solid tumours known to express tissue factor., Methods: InnovaTV 201 is a phase 1-2, open-label, dose-escalation and dose-expansion study done at 21 centres in the USA and Europe. Patients (aged ≥18 years) had relapsed, advanced, or metastatic cancer of the ovary, cervix, endometrium, bladder, prostate, oesophagus, squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck or non-small-cell lung cancer; an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1; and had relapsed after or were not eligible to receive the available standard of care. No specific tissue factor expression level was required for inclusion. In the dose-escalation phase, patients were treated with tisotumab vedotin between 0·3 and 2·2 mg/kg intravenously once every 3 weeks in a traditional 3 + 3 design. In the dose-expansion phase, patients were treated at the recommended phase 2 dose. The primary endpoint was the incidence of adverse events, including serious adverse events, infusion-related, treatment-related and those of grade 3 or worse, and study drug-related adverse events, analysed in all patients who received at least one dose of tisotumab vedotin (full analysis population). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02001623, and is closed to new participants with follow-up ongoing., Findings: Between Dec 9, 2013, and May 18, 2015, 27 eligible patients were enrolled to the dose-escalation phase. Dose-limiting toxicities, including grade 3 type 2 diabetes mellitus, mucositis, and neutropenic fever, were seen at the 2·2 mg/kg dose; therefore, 2·0 mg/kg of tisotumab vedotin intravenously once every 3 weeks was established as the recommended phase 2 dose. Between Oct 8, 2015, and April 26, 2018, 147 eligible patients were enrolled to the dose-expansion phase. The most common (in ≥20% of patients) treatment-emergent adverse events of any grade were epistaxis (102 [69%] of 147 patients), fatigue (82 [56%]), nausea (77 [52%]), alopecia (64 [44%]), conjunctivitis (63 [43%]), decreased appetite (53 [36%]), constipation (52 [35%]), diarrhoea (44 [30%]), vomiting (42 [29%]), peripheral neuropathy (33 [22%]), dry eye (32 [22%]), and abdominal pain (30 [20%]). The most common adverse events of grade 3 or worse were fatigue (14 [10%] of 147 patients), anaemia (eight [5%]), abdominal pain (six [4%]), hypokalaemia (six [4%]), conjunctivitis (five [3%]), hyponatraemia (five [3%]), and vomiting (five [3%]). 67 (46%) of 147 patients had a treatment-emergent serious adverse event. 39 (27%) of 147 patients had a treatment-emergent serious adverse event related to the study drug. Infusion-related reactions occurred in 17 (12%) of 147 patients. Across tumour types, the confirmed proportion of patients who achieved an objective response was 15·6% (95% CI 10·2-22·5; 23 of 147 patients). There were nine deaths across all study phases (three in the dose-escalation phase and six in the dose-expansion phase); only one case of pneumonia in the dose-expansion phase was considered possibly related to study treatment., Interpretations: Tisotumab vedotin has a manageable safety profile with encouraging preliminary antitumour activity across multiple tumour types in heavily pretreated patients. Continued evaluation of tisotumab vedotin is warranted in solid tumours., Funding: Genmab A/S., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background To determine the recommended dose (RD) of a combination of PM01183 and gemcitabine in patients with advanced solid tumors. Methods Forty-five patients received escalating doses of PM01183/gemcitabine on Days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks (d1,8 q3wk) following a standard 3 + 3 design. Results PM01183 3.5 mg flat dose (FD)/gemcitabine 1000 mg/m 2 was the highest dose level tested. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were mostly hematological and resulted in the expansion of a lower dose level (PM01183 3.5 mg FD/gemcitabine 800 mg/m 2 ); 19 patients at this dose level were evaluable but >30% had DLT and >20% had febrile neutropenia. No DLT was observed in 11 patients treated at PM01183 3.0 mg FD/gemcitabine 800 mg/m 2 , which was defined as the RD. This regimen was feasible and tolerable with manageable toxicity; mainly grade 3/4 myelosuppression. Non-hematological toxicity comprised fatigue, nausea, vomiting, and transaminases increases. Fifteen (33%) patients received ≥6 cycles with no cumulative hematological toxicity. Pharmacokinetic analysis showed no evidence of drug-drug interaction. Nine of 38 patients had response as per RECIST (complete [3%] and partial [21%]), for an overall response rate (ORR) of 24% (95% Confidence Interval [CI] 12-40%). Eleven patients (29%) had disease stabilization ≥4 months. Responses were durable (median of 8.5 months): overall median progression-free survival (PFS) was 4.2 months (95% CI, 2.7-6.5 months). Conclusions The RD for this combination is PM01183 3.0 mg FD (or 1.6 mg/m 2 )/gemcitabine 800 mg/m 2 d1,8 q3wk. This schedule is well tolerated and has antitumor activity in several advanced solid tumor types.

The aim of this work is to compare Bayesian Inference for nonlinear models with commonly used traditional non-linear regression (NR) algorithms for estimating tracer kinetics in Dynamic Contrast Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging (DCE-MRI). The algorithms are compared in terms of accuracy, and reproducibility under different initialization settings. Further it is investigated how a more robust estimation of tracer kinetics affects cancer diagnosis. The derived tracer kinetics from the Bayesian algorithm were validated against traditional NR algorithms (i.e. Levenberg-Marquardt, simplex) in terms of accuracy on a digital DCE phantom and in terms of goodness-of-fit (Kolmogorov-Smirnov test) on ROI-based concentration time courses from two different patient cohorts. The first cohort consisted of 76 men, 20 of whom had significant peripheral zone prostate cancer (any cancer-core-length (CCL) with Gleason>3+3 or any-grade with CCL>=4mm) following transperineal template prostate mapping biopsy. The second cohort consisted of 9 healthy volunteers and 24 patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. The diagnostic ability of the derived tracer kinetics was assessed with receiver operating characteristic area under curve (ROC AUC) analysis. The Bayesian algorithm accurately recovered the ground-truth tracer kinetics for the digital DCE phantom consistently improving the Structural Similarity Index (SSIM) across the 50 different initializations compared to NR. For optimized initialization, Bayesian did not improve significantly the fitting accuracy on both patient cohorts, and it only significantly improved the v e ROC AUC on the HN population from ROC AUC=0.56 for the simplex to ROC AUC=0.76. For both cohorts, the values and the diagnostic ability of tracer kinetic parameters estimated with the Bayesian algorithm weren't affected by their initialization. To conclude, the Bayesian algorithm led to a more accurate and reproducible quantification of tracer kinetic parameters in DCE-MRI, improving their ROC-AUC and decreasing their dependence on initialization settings., (Crown Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Baseline neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) has been repeatedly reported as a significant prognostic factor in advanced cancer patients. We explored whether changes in NLR may predict outcome of advanced cancer patients enrolled into phase 1 trials and treated with PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors., Patients and Methods: Advanced cancer patients enrolled into phase 1 trials between September 2013 and May 2016 and treated with anti-PD-1/PD-L1 agents were included in this retrospective study. NLR was calculated at baseline and after 2 cycles of treatment. Royal Marsden Hospital (RMH) prognostic score and Eastern Cooperative Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) were determined at baseline. Kaplan-Meier estimation and Cox regression analyses were used to assess the impact of NLR dynamics on PFS., Results: Among the 55 patients eligible, 26 (47%) were treated with anti-PD-L1 monotherapy, 22 (40%) received single agent anti-PD-1, and 7 (13%) were given a tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) plus a PD-1 inhibitor. Neither ECOG PS nor RMH prognostic score was significantly associated with PFS in our cohort, whereas changes in NLR significantly impacted on PFS., Conclusion: Changes in the NLR may be a useful predicting factor in advanced cancer patients treated with anti-PD-1/PD-L1 agents. Further prospective trials are needed to verify these findings.

In countries with the best cancer outcomes, approximately 60% of patients receive radiotherapy as part of their treatment, which is one of the most cost-effective cancer treatments. Notably, around 40% of cancer cures include the use of radiotherapy, either as a single modality or combined with other treatments. Radiotherapy can provide enormous benefit to patients with cancer. In the past decade, significant technical advances, such as image-guided radiotherapy, intensity-modulated radiotherapy, stereotactic radiotherapy, and proton therapy enable higher doses of radiotherapy to be delivered to the tumour with significantly lower doses to normal surrounding tissues. However, apart from the combination of traditional cytotoxic chemotherapy with radiotherapy, little progress has been made in identifying and defining optimal targeted therapy and radiotherapy combinations to improve the efficacy of cancer treatment. The National Cancer Research Institute Clinical and Translational Radiotherapy Research Working Group (CTRad) formed a Joint Working Group with representatives from academia, industry, patient groups and regulatory bodies to address this lack of progress and to publish recommendations for future clinical research. Herein, we highlight the Working Group's consensus recommendations to increase the number of novel drugs being successfully registered in combination with radiotherapy to improve clinical outcomes for patients with cancer.

Background: Photochemical internalisation, a novel minimally invasive treatment, has shown promising preclinical results in enhancing and site-directing the effect of anticancer drugs by illumination, which initiates localised chemotherapy release. We assessed the safety and tolerability of a newly developed photosensitiser, disulfonated tetraphenyl chlorin (TPCS2a), in mediating photochemical internalisation of bleomycin in patients with advanced and recurrent solid malignancies., Methods: In this phase 1, dose-escalation, first-in-man trial, we recruited patients (aged ≥18 to <85 years) with local recurrent, advanced, or metastatic cutaneous or subcutaneous malignancies who were clinically assessed as eligible for bleomycin chemotherapy from a single centre in the UK. Patients were given TPCS2a on day 0 by slow intravenous injection, followed by a fixed dose of 15 000 IU/m(2) bleomycin by intravenous infusion on day 4. After 3 h, the surface of the target tumour was illuminated with 652 nm laser light (fixed at 60 J/cm(2)). The TPCS2a starting dose was 0·25 mg/kg and was then escalated in successive dose cohorts of three patients (0·5, 1·0, and 1·5 mg/kg). The primary endpoints were safety and tolerability of TPCS2a; other co-primary endpoints were dose-limiting toxicity and maximum tolerated dose. The primary analysis was per protocol. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00993512, and has been completed., Findings: Between Oct 3, 2009, and Jan 14, 2014, we recruited 22 patients into the trial. 12 patients completed the 3-month follow-up period. Adverse events related to photochemical internalisation were either local, resulting from the local inflammatory process, or systemic, mostly as a result of the skin-photosensitising effect of TPCS2a. The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were unexpected higher transient pain response (grade 3) localised to the treatment site recorded in nine patients, and respiratory failure (grade 4) noted in two patients. One dose-limiting toxicity was reported in the 1·0 mg/kg cohort (skin photosensitivity [grade 2]). Dose-limiting toxicities were reported in two of three patients at a TPCS2a dose of 1·5 mg/kg (skin photosensitivity [grade 3] and wound infection [grade 3]); thus, the maximum tolerated dose of TPCS2a was 1·0 mg/kg. Administration of TPCS2a was found to be safe and tolerable by all patients. No deaths related to photochemical internalisation treatment occurred., Interpretation: TPCS2a-mediated photochemical internalisation of bleomycin is safe and tolerable. We identified TPCS2a 0·25 mg/kg as the recommended treatment dose for future trials., Funding: PCI Biotech., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Several prognostic indices have been devised to optimize patient selection for phase 1 oncology trials with no consensus as to the optimal score and none qualifying as a marker of treatment response., Methods: Multivariate predictors of overall survival (OS) were tested on 118 referred patients to develop the Hammersmith Score (HS). The score's ability to predict OS, progression-free survival (PFS), and 90-day mortality (90DM) was compared with other prognostic indices. Changes in HS were recalculated during treatment., Results: Albumin<35 g/L, lactate dehydrogenase>450 U/L, and sodium<135 mmol/L emerged as independent prognostic factors. These were used with equal weighting to devise the HS, a compound prognostic index ranging from 0 to 3. High (HS=2-3) score predicted worse OS (hazard ratio [HR]=6.5, P<.001), PFS (HR=2.8, P=.01), and 90DM (OR=9.0, P<.001). HS was a more accurate multivariate predictor of OS (HR=6.4, P<.001, C-index=0.72), PFS (HR=2.7, P=.03), and 90DM (area under the ROC curve 0.703) compared with other scores. Worsening of the HS during treatment predicted for shorter OS (P<.001). HS retained prognostic and predictive ability following external validation., Conclusions: HS is a simple, validated index to optimize patient selection and predict survival benefit from phase 1 oncology treatments. Prospective validation is ongoing., (© 2013 American Cancer Society.)

Background: Adequate organ function and good performance status (PS) are common eligibility criteria for phase I trials. As inflammation is pathogenic and prognostic in cancer we investigated the prognostic performance of inflammation-based indices including the neutrophil (NLR) and platelet to lymphocyte ratio (PLR)., Methods: We studied inflammatory scores in 118 unselected referrals. NLR normalization was recalculated at disease reassessment. Each variable was assessed for progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) on uni- and multivariate analyses and tested for 90 days survival (90DS) prediction using receiving operator curves (ROC)., Results: We included 118 patients with median OS 4.4 months, 23% PS>1. LDH≥450 and NLR≥5 were multivariate predictors of OS (p<0.001). NLR normalization predicted for longer OS (p<0.001) and PFS (p<0.05). PS and NLR ranked as most accurate predictors of both 90DS with area under ROC values of 0.66 and 0.64, and OS with c-score of 0.69 and 0.60. The combination of NLR+PS increased prognostic accuracy to 0.72. The NLR was externally validated in a cohort of 126 subjects., Conclusions: We identified the NLR as a validated and objective index to improve patient selection for experimental therapies, with its normalization following treatment predicting for a survival benefit of 7 months. Prospective validation of the NLR is warranted.

Background: Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) is implicated in DNA repair and transcription regulation. Niraparib (MK4827) is an oral potent, selective PARP-1 and PARP-2 inhibitor that induces synthetic lethality in preclinical tumour models with loss of BRCA and PTEN function. We investigated the safety, tolerability, maximum tolerated dose, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles, and preliminary antitumour activity of niraparib., Methods: In a phase 1 dose-escalation study, we enrolled patients with advanced solid tumours at one site in the UK and two sites in the USA. Eligible patients were aged at least 18 years; had a life expectancy of at least 12 weeks; had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or less; had assessable disease; were not suitable to receive any established treatments; had adequate organ function; and had discontinued any previous anticancer treatments at least 4 weeks previously. In part A, cohorts of three to six patients, enriched for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, received niraparib daily at ten escalating doses from 30 mg to 400 mg in a 21-day cycle to establish the maximum tolerated dose. Dose expansion at the maximum tolerated dose was pursued in 15 patients to confirm tolerability. In part B, we further investigated the maximum tolerated dose in patients with sporadic platinum-resistant high-grade serous ovarian cancer and sporadic prostate cancer. We obtained blood, circulating tumour cells, and optional paired tumour biopsies for pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic assessments. Toxic effects were assessed by common toxicity criteria and tumour responses ascribed by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST). Circulating tumour cells and archival tumour tissue in prostate patients were analysed for exploratory putative predictive biomarkers, such as loss of PTEN expression and ETS rearrangements. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00749502., Findings: Between Sept 15, 2008, and Jan 14, 2011, we enrolled 100 patients: 60 in part A and 40 in part B. 300 mg/day was established as the maximum tolerated dose. Dose-limiting toxic effects reported in the first cycle were grade 3 fatigue (one patient given 30 mg/day), grade 3 pneumonitis (one given 60 mg/day), and grade 4 thrombocytopenia (two given 400 mg/day). Common treatment-related toxic effects were anaemia (48 patients [48%]), nausea (42 [42%]), fatigue (42 [42%]), thrombocytopenia (35 [35%]), anorexia (26 [26%]), neutropenia (24 [24%]), constipation (23 [23%]), and vomiting (20 [20%]), and were predominantly grade 1 or 2. Pharmacokinetics were dose proportional and the mean terminal elimination half-life was 36·4 h (range 32·8-46·0). Pharmacodynamic analyses confirmed PARP inhibition exceeded 50% at doses greater than 80 mg/day and antitumour activity was documented beyond doses of 60 mg/day. Eight (40% [95% CI 19-64]) of 20 BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers with ovarian cancer had RECIST partial responses, as did two (50% [7-93]) of four mutation carriers with breast cancer. Antitumour activity was also reported in sporadic high-grade serous ovarian cancer, non-small-cell lung cancer, and prostate cancer. We recorded no correlation between loss of PTEN expression or ETS rearrangements and measures of antitumour activity in patients with prostate cancer., Interpretation: A recommended phase 2 dose of 300 mg/day niraparib is well tolerated. Niraparib should be further assessed in inherited and sporadic cancers with homologous recombination DNA repair defects and to target PARP-mediated transcription in cancer., Funding: Merck Sharp and Dohme., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Drug discovery and early clinical development is an international endeavor, conducted in partnership between commercial entities such as biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies and academic investigators. Although once considered quite disparate, early clinical trials requirements and conduct are largely harmonized between the European Union, Japan, and the United States, increasing the opportunities for productive commercial-academic collaborations.

Purpose: Patupilone is a microtubule-targeting chemotherapeutic agent with clinical activity in a broad range of taxane-sensitive/resistant tumor types. The present phase Ib study examined the safety/tolerability and pharmacokinetics of patupilone in combination with carboplatin in patients with advanced solid tumors., Experimental Design: Patients with advanced cancer received patupilone via a 5- to 10-min i.v. infusion at doses of 3.6 to 6.0 mg/m(2) q3w, immediately followed by carboplatin area under the curve (AUC) 5 or 6 mg/mL/min., Results: Of the 37 patients enrolled, the majority previously received taxanes (81%) and/or platinum-containing drugs (97.3%). The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of patupilone with carboplatin AUC 6 was 4.8 mg/m(2); additional patients were enrolled to consolidate experience at this dose. Of the 22 patients who received the MTD, the most common nonhematologic adverse events were fatigue in six (27.3%) and diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, and neuropathy in one each (4.5%; all grade 3); hematologic toxicities included two patients (9.1%) with grade 3 neutropenia. The pharmacokinetics of patupilone were similar to those in a previous study of patupilone monotherapy. Of the 26 patients with recurrent platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer, tumor response was assessable by response evaluation criteria in solid tumors in 17; 1 patient (6%) achieved a complete response, and 10 (59%) achieved a partial response., Conclusions: The combination of patupilone 4.8 mg/m(2)/carboplatin AUC 6 was well tolerated and showed antitumor activity similar to established regimens in patients with recurrent platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer. The optimal dose for this regimen is currently being further refined in phase II trials.