Search

Purpose: Immune gene expression signatures are emerging as potential biomarkers for immunotherapy (IO). VIGex is a 12-gene expression classifier developed in both nCounter (Nanostring) and RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) assays and analytically validated across laboratories. VIGex classifies tumor samples into hot, intermediate-cold (I-Cold), and cold subgroups. VIGex-Hot has been associated with better IO treatment outcomes. Here, we investigated the performance of VIGex and other IO biomarkers in an independent data set of patients treated with pembrolizumab in the INSPIRE phase II clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02644369)., Materials and Methods: Patients with advanced solid tumors were treated with pembrolizumab 200 mg IV once every 3 weeks. Tumor RNA-seq data from baseline tumor samples were classified by the VIGex algorithm. Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) was measured at baseline and start of cycle 3 using the bespoke Signatera assay. VIGex-Hot was compared with VIGex I-Cold + Cold and four groups were defined on the basis of the combination of VIGex subgroups and the change in ctDNA at cycle 3 from baseline (ΔctDNA)., Results: Seventy-six patients were enrolled, including 16 ovarian, 12 breast, 12 head and neck cancers, 10 melanoma, and 26 other tumor types. Objective response rate was 24% in VIGex-Hot and 10% in I-Cold/Cold. VIGex-Hot subgroup was associated with higher overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) when included in a multivariable model adjusted for tumor type, tumor mutation burden, and PD-L1 immunohistochemistry. The addition of ΔctDNA improved the predictive performance of the baseline VIGex classification for both OS and PFS., Conclusion: Our data indicate that the addition of ΔctDNA to baseline VIGex may refine prediction for IO.

Early kinetics of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) in plasma predict response to pembrolizumab but typically requires sequencing of matched tumor tissue or fixed gene panels. We analyzed genome-wide methylation and fragment-length profiles using cell-free methylated DNA immunoprecipitation and sequencing (cfMeDIP-seq) in 204 plasma samples from 87 patients before and during treatment with pembrolizumab from a pan-cancer phase II investigator-initiated trial (INSPIRE). We trained a pan-cancer methylation signature using independent methylation array data from The Cancer Genome Atlas to quantify cancer-specific methylation (CSM) and fragment-length score (FLS) for each sample. CSM and FLS are strongly correlated with tumor-informed ctDNA levels. Early kinetics of CSM predict overall survival and progression-free survival, independently of tumor type, PD-L1, and tumor mutation burden. Early kinetics of FLS are associated with overall survival independently of CSM. Our tumor-naïve mutation-agnostic ctDNA approach integrating methylomics and fragmentomics could predict outcomes in patients treated with pembrolizumab., Significance: Analysis of methylation and fragment length in plasma using cfMeDIP-seq provides a tumor-naive approach to measure ctDNA with results comparable with a tumor-informed bespoke ctDNA. Early kinetics within the first weeks of treatment in methylation and fragment quantity can predict outcomes with pembrolizumab in patients with various advanced solid tumors. This article is featured in Selected Articles from This Issue, p. 897., (©2024 The Authors; Published by the American Association for Cancer Research.)

MEK inhibitors have immunomodulatory activity and potential for synergistic activity when combined with PD-1 inhibitors. We evaluated selumetinib (inhibitor of MEK1/2) plus pembrolizumab (anti‒PD-1 antibody) in patients with advanced/metastatic solid tumors. In this phase 1b study, adults with previously treated advanced/metastatic solid tumors received pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks plus selumetinib on days 1‒14 per 3-week cycle (2 weeks on/1 week off); selumetinib dosing began at 50 mg orally twice daily with escalation in 25 mg increments for ≤ 35 cycles. Primary endpoints were dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), adverse events (AEs), and treatment discontinuations due to AEs. Thirty-two patients were enrolled. Dose escalation was completed up to selumetinib 125 mg twice daily. The target DLT rate of 30% was not reached at any dose level. In the selumetinib 100 mg group, 2/11 patients (18.2%) experienced DLTs (n = 1 grade 3 diarrhea, n = 1 grade 3 fatigue). In the selumetinib 125 mg group, 3/14 (21.4%) experienced DLTs (n = 1 grade 2 retinal detachment, n = 1 grade 3 retinopathy, n = 1 grade 3 stomatitis). Dose-related changes in pharmacokinetic exposures were observed for selumetinib and N-desmethyl selumetinib up to 100 mg (saturation at 125 mg). Two patients achieved partial responses (1 each with selumetinib 75 mg and 125 mg) for an objective response rate of 6%. The study was stopped early because of insufficient efficacy. Although the target DLT rate was not reached at any dose level and no new safety signals were identified, selumetinib plus pembrolizumab had limited antitumor activity in this population. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT03833427., (© 2024. Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA and its affiliates and Maxime Chénard-Poirier, Aaron R. Hansen, Martin E. Gutierrez, Drew Rasco, Yan Xing, Manish R. Sharma.)

Purpose: In this first-in-human, Phase 1, open-label, multicenter study, we evaluated JNJ-64619178, a selective and potent PRMT5 inhibitor, in patients with advanced malignant solid tumors or non-Hodgkin lymphomas (NHL). The primary objective was to evaluate the safety and to identify a recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D) of JNJ-64619178., Patients and Methods: Adult patients with treatment-refractory advanced solid tumors or NHL and measurable disease received escalating doses of JNJ-64619178 following two schedules (Schedule A: 14 days on/7 days off; Schedule B: every day on a 21-day cycle). Safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), and clinical activity were evaluated., Results: Ninety patients received JNJ-64619178. Thrombocytopenia was identified as the only dose-limiting toxicity. JNJ-64619178 showed dose-proportional PK and robust target engagement, as measured by plasma symmetric dimethylarginine, across all dose levels. The objective response rate was 5.6% (5 of 90). Patients with adenoid cystic carcinoma (ACC) had an ORR of 11.5% (3 of 26) and a median progression-free survival of 19.1 months., Conclusions: JNJ-64619178 demonstrated manageable dose-dependent toxicity and preliminary evidence of antitumor activity in ACC and other tumor types. Plasma exposure was dose dependent, and target inhibition was maintained with intermittent and continuous dosing. On the basis of safety, clinical activity, PK, and PD findings, two provisional RP2Ds were selected: 1.5 mg intermittently and 1.0 mg once daily. Aside from ACC, clinical benefit was limited, and biomarkers to enrich for responsiveness to PRMT5 inhibition will be needed for further development., (©2023 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Background: Patient perspectives are fundamental to defining tolerability of investigational anti-neoplastic therapies in clinical trials. Phase I trials present a unique challenge in designing tools for efficiently collecting patient-reported outcomes (PROs) given the difficulty of anticipating adverse events of relevance. However, phase I trials also offer an opportunity for investigators to optimize drug dosing based on tolerability for future larger-scale trials and in eventual clinical practice. Existing tools for comprehensively capturing PROs are generally cumbersome and are not routinely used in phase I trials., Methods: Here, we describe the creation of a tailored survey based on the National Cancer Institute's PRO-CTCAE for collecting patients' perspectives on symptomatic adverse events in phase I trials in oncology., Results: We describe our stepwise approach to condensing the original 78-symptom library into a modified 30 term core list of symptoms which can be efficiently applied. We further show that our tailored survey aligns with phase I trialists' perspectives on symptoms of relevance., Conclusions: This tailored survey represents the first PRO tool developed specifically for assessing tolerability in the phase I oncology population. We provide recommendations for future work aimed at integrating this survey into clinical practice., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: The phase I first-in-human study ENGAGE-1 evaluated the humanized IgG1 OX40 agonistic monoclonal antibody GSK3174998 alone (Part 1 (P1)) or in combination with pembrolizumab (Part 2 (P2)) in patients with advanced solid tumors., Methods: GSK3174998 (0.003-10 mg/kg) ± pembrolizumab (200 mg) was administered intravenously every 3 weeks using a continuous reassessment method for dose escalation. Primary objectives were safety and tolerability; secondary objectives included pharmacokinetics, immunogenicity, pharmacodynamics, and clinical activity., Results: 138 patients were enrolled (45 (P1) and 96 (P2, including 3 crossovers)). Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 51% (P1) and 64% (P2) of patients, fatigue being the most common (11% and 24%, respectively). No dose-toxicity relationship was observed, and maximum-tolerated dose was not reached. Dose-limiting toxicities (P2) included Grade 3 (G3) pleural effusion and G1 myocarditis with G3 increased troponin. GSK3174998 ≥0.3 mg/kg demonstrated pharmacokinetic linearity and >80% receptor occupancy on circulating T cells; 0.3 mg/kg was selected for further evaluation. Limited clinical activity was observed for GSK3174998 (P1: disease control rate (DCR) ≥24 weeks 9%) and was not greater than that expected for pembrolizumab alone (P2: overall response rate 8%, DCR ≥24 weeks 28%). Multiplexed immunofluorescence data from paired biopsies suggested that increased infiltration of natural killer (NK)/natural killer T (NKT) cells and decreased regulatory T cells (Tregs) in the tumor microenvironment may contribute to clinical responses: CD16+CD56-CD134+ NK /NKT cells and CD3+CD4+FOXP3+CD134+ Tregs exhibited the largest magnitude of change on treatment, whereas CD3+CD8+granzyme B+PD-1+CD134+ cytotoxic T cells were the least variable. Tumor gene expression profiling revealed an upregulation of inflammatory responses, T-cell proliferation, and NK cell function on treatment with some inflammatory cytokines upregulated in peripheral blood. However, target engagement, evidenced by pharmacologic activity in peripheral blood and tumor tissue, did not correlate with clinical efficacy. The low number of responses precluded identifying a robust biomarker signature predictive of response., Conclusions: GSK3174998±pembrolizumab was well tolerated over the dose range tested and demonstrated target engagement. Limited clinical activity does not support further development of GSK3174998±pembrolizumab in advanced cancers., Trial Registration Number: NCT02528357., Competing Interests: Competing interests: SP-V is a principal/subinvestigator of clinical trials for AbbVie, Adaptimmune, Adlai Nortye USA Inc, Aduro Biotech, Agios Pharmaceuticals, Amgen, Argenx BVBA, Arno Therapeutics, Astex Pharmaceuticals, AstraZeneca A, Aveo, Basilea Pharmaceutica International Ltd, Bayer Healthcare AG, BBB Technologies BV, Beigene, BicycleTx Ltd, Bioalliance Pharma, Blueprint Medicines, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Pharmaceuticals, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene Corporation, Chugai Pharmaceutical Co, Cullinan-Apollo, Curevarc, Daiichi Sankyo, Debiopharm, Eisai, Eisai Limited, Eli Lilly, Exelixis, Faron Pharmaceuticals Ltd, Forma Tharapeutics, GamaMabs, Genentech, GSK, H3 Biomedicine, Hoffmann La Roche AG, Imcheck Therapeutics, Innate Pharma, Institut De Recherche Pierre Fabre, Iris Servier, Iteos Belgium SA, Janssen Cilag, Janssen Research Foundation, Kura Oncology, Kyowa Kirin Pharm. Dev, Lilly France, Loxo Oncology, Lytix Biopharma AS, Medimmune, Menarini Ricerche, Merck Sharp & Dohme Chibret, Merus, Molecular Partners AG, Nanobiotix, Nektar Therapeutics, Novartis Pharma, Octimet Oncology NV, Oncoethix, Oncopeptides, Onyx Therapeutics, Orion Pharma, Oryzon Genomics, Ose Pharma, Pfizer, Pharma Mar, Pierre Fabre Medicament, Plexxikon, Roche, Sanofi Aventis, Seattle Genetics, Sotio A.S, Syros Pharmaceuticals, Taiho Pharma, Tesaro, Turning Point Therapeutics, and Xencor outside the submitted work; non-financial support (drug supplied) from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, GSK, Medimmune, Merck, NH TherAGuiX, Pfizer, Roche; research funding from Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Roche, and Merck KGaA for projects unrelated to this manuscript. VL reports consulting for Takeda, Seattle Genetics, Bristol Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, Guardant Health; research funding from GSK, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, Seattle Genetics. WR reports nothing to disclose. TMB reports consulting for Guardant Health, Loxo Pharmaceuticals, Pfizer, Exelixis, Blueprint Medicines, Foundation Medicine, Bayer, AstraZeneca, Ignyta, Moderna Therapeutics, Pfizer. Speakers Bureau: Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Lilly; research funding from Daiichi Sankyo, Medpacto, Inc., Incyte, Mirati Therapeutics, MedImmune, AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Leap Therapeutics, MabVax, Stemline Therapeutics, Merck, Lilly, GSK, Novartis, Pfizer, Genentech/Roche, Deciphera, Merrimack, Immunogen, Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Ignyta, Calithera Biosciences, Kolltan Pharmaceuticals, Principa Biopharma, Peleton, Immunocore, Aileron Therapeutics, Bristol Myers Squibb, Amgen, Moderna Therapeutics, Sanofi, Boehringer Ingelheim, Astellas Pharma, Five Prime Therapeutics, Jacobio, Top Alliance BioScience, Loxo, Janssen, Clovis Oncology, Takeda, Karyopharm Therapeutics, Onyx, Phosplatin Therapeutics, Foundation Medicine, and ARMO BioScience; personal expenses from Astellas Pharma, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Clovis Oncology, EMD Serono, Genentech, Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pharmacyclics, Sysmex, and Pfizer. AHa reports research funding from Genentech/Roche, Merck, GSK, Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis, Boston Biomedical, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca/Medimmune Eisai; personal fees from Merck and GSK. DCC is a consultant for Nektar, Pfizer, Werewolf, and HUYA. FSH reports research funding from Bristol Myers Squibb and Novartis; receives personal fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, EMD Serono, Novartis, Surface, Compass Therapeutics, Apricity, Sanofi, Pionyr, Torque, Bicara, Checkpoint Therapeutics, Genentech/Roche, Bioentre, Gossamer, Iovance, Trillium, Catalym, Immunocore, Amgen, Kairos, Eisai, and Rheos. JHMS is a shareholder and part-time employee of Modra Pharmaceuticals BV and patent holder of oral taxanes; reports consulting for Debiopharm. JKL reports other from GSK, Novartis, Medivation/Pfizer, Genentech, EMD-Serono, AstraZeneca, Medimmune, Zenith, Ayala, UpToDate review panels for NCCN, ASCO, NIH PDQ, Medlearning, Physicians Education Resource, Prime Oncology, Medscape, Clinical Care Options, Medpage. SA reports advisory board participation for MSD, Sanofi, Roche, Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer; research support from Sanofi. KAA reports research funding (to institution) from Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Amgen, Trishula, GSK, Merck, and Eli Lilly. FO is a principal/subinvestigator of clinical trials for Amgen, AstraZeneca, Cytovation, GSK, Lilly, MSD, Revmed, Incyte, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Roche/Genentech, Exelexis, Relay, and InterRNA. MM reports research funding from Alpine Immune Sciences, Arcus Biosciences, Arvinas, Ascentage Pharma Group, Bayer, Bicycle Therapeutics, BioMed Valley Discoveries, BioNTech, Dragonfly Therapeutics, EMD Serono, Epizyme, Erasca, Exelixis, Foghorn Therapeutics, Genentech, Gilead Sciences, GSK, IDEAYA Biosciences, Ikena Oncology, ImmVira Pharma, Infinity Pharmaceuticals, Jacobio Pharmaceuticals, Kechow Pharma, Kezar Life Sciences, Kinnate BioPharma, MedImmune, Mereo BioPharma, Metabomed, Moderna, NBE Therapeutics, Nektar, Novartis, Oncorus, PACT Pharma, Pfizer, Plexxikon, Prelude Therapeutics, Pyramid Biosciences, Regeneron, Sapience Therapeutics, Scholar Rock Seattle Genetics, Synthrox, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, Teneobio, Tempest Therapeutics, Tizona Therapeutics, TMUNITY Therapeutics, TopAlliance Biosciences, and Xilio. M; consulting/advisory role for Astellas Pharma, AstraZeneca, BicycleTX Limited, Castle Biosciences, Eisai, Ideaya Biosciences, iTeos, Pfizer, and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals. NS reports consulting/advisory role for Deciphera, AADi, Blueprint Medicines, Bayer, Epizyme, and Boehringer Ingelheim; research funding from GSK, Karyopharm, Deciphera, Ascentage Pharma, Daiichi Sankyo/Lilly, and AstraZeneca/MedImmune. SC is the principal/subinvestigator of clinical trials for AbbVie, Adaptimmune, Adlai Nortye USA Inc, Aduro Biotech, Agios Pharmaceuticals, Amgen, Astex Pharmaceuticals, AstraZeneca AB, Aveo, Basilea Pharmaceutica International Ltd, Bayer Healthcare AG, BBB Technologies BV, Beigene, BicycleTx Ltd, Blueprint Medicines, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Pharmaceuticals, Bristol Myers Squibb, Casi Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Celgene Corporation (a Bristol-Myers Squibb company), Cellcentric, Chugai Pharmaceutical Co, Cullinan-Apollo, Curevarc, Cytovasion, Daiichi Sankyo, Debiopharm, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Exelixis, Faron Pharmaceuticals Ltd, Forma Tharapeutics, GamaMabs, Genentech, GSK, H3 Biomedicine, Hoffmann La Roche AG, Imcheck Therapeutics, Incyte Corporation, Innate Pharma, Institut De Recherche Pierre Fabre, Iris Servier, Iteos Belgium SA, Janssen Cilag, Janssen Research Foundation, Janssen R&D LLC, Kura Oncology, Kyowa Kirin Pharm. Dev, Lilly France, Loxo Oncology, Medimmune, Menarini Ricerche, Merck, Merck Sharp & Dohme Chibret, Merrimack Pharmaceuticals, Merus, Molecular Partners AG, Nanobiotix, Nektar Therapeutics, Novartis Pharma, Octimet Oncology NV, Oncoethix, Oncopeptides, Orion Pharma, Genomics, Ose Pharma, Pfizer, Pharma Mar, Pierre Fabre Medicament, Relay Therapeutics, Inc, Roche, Sanofi Aventis, Seattle Genetics, Sotio, Syros Pharmaceuticals, Taiho Pharma, Tesaro, Transgene SA, Turning Point Therapeutics, and Xencor; reports research grants from AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, GSK, INCA, Janssen Cilag, Merck, Pfizer, Roche, and Sanofi; reports non-financial support (drug supplied) from AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, GSK, Medimmune, Merck, NH TherAGuiX, Pfizer, and Roche; reports honoraria from Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eisai, Genmab, Janssen, Merck, Novartis and Roche; reports participation in advisory boards for Alderaan Biotechnology, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Avacta, Ellipses Pharma, Oncovita, Seagen, UltraHuman8; reports travel and congress support from AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, Ose Pharma, Roche, Sotio. MA reports research funding (to institution) from Genentech, Nektar Therapeutics, Merck, GSK, Novartis, Jounce Therapeutics, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Adaptimmune, Shattuck Lab, and Gilead. Advisory boards: GSK, Shattuck Lab, Bristol Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca; reports speaker fees from AstraZeneca, and Nektar Therapeutics. AS reports participation in advisory boards for Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis, Oncorus, Janssen, Medison, and Immunocore; reports research support: Novartis, Bristol Myers Squibb, Symphogen AstraZeneca/Medimmune, Merck, Bayer, Surface Oncology, Northern Biologics, Janssen Oncology/Johnson & Johnson, Roche, Regeneron, Alkermes, Array Biopharma/Pfizer, GSK, Treadwell, and Amgen. OR reports employment with AstraZeneca; reports research funding from Merck; reports speaker for activities supported by educational grants from Bristol Myers Squibb and Merck; reports consulting for Merck, Celgene, Five Prime, GSK, Bayer, Roche/Genentech, Puretech, Imvax, Sobi, Boehringer Ingelheim; reports pending patent for “Methods of using pembrolizumab and trebananib”. EMP, CMA, HZ, HS, SAG, MW, KMY, NY, and AHo report employment with GSK. MJC is an employee of Merck and owns stock. EVS is an employee of Merck. AM has been a principal or coinvestigator of clinical trials using OX40-targeted agents and/or has provided consulting services for Roche/Genentech, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, GSK, HiFiBiO, Bristol Myers Squibb, Shattuck Labs. JW reports consulting for Merck, Genentech, AstraZeneca, GSK, Novartis, Nektar, Celldex, Incyte, Biond, ImCheck, Sellas, Evaxion and EMD Serono; reports participation in advisory boards for Bristol Myers Squibb (compensated), CytoMx, Incyte, ImCheck, Biond, Sellas, Instil Bio, OncoC4, and Neximmune; reports equity holdings in Biond, Evaxion, Instil Bio, OncoC4, and Neximmune; reports research support (to institution) from Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, GSK, Moderna, Pfizer, Novartis, and AstraZeneca, Moffitt Cancer Center; reports patent for ipilimumab biomarker and tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes preparation and a PD-1 patent (Biodesix). JVH reports other from GSK, AstraZeneca, Checkmate Pharmaceuticals, Brightpath Biotherapeutics, Eli Lilly & Co, Kairos Venture Investments, Triptych Health Partners; reports patent with Spectrum Pharmaceuticals., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Adverse event (AE) reporting in early-phase clinical trials is essential in determining the tolerability of experimental anticancer therapies. The patient-reported outcome version of the CTCAE (PRO-CTCAE) evaluates AE components such as severity and interference in daily life. The aim of this study was to correlate the grade of clinician-reported AEs with patients' reported experience of these toxicities using PRO-CTCAE., Methods: Patients with advanced solid tumours enrolled on Phase I clinical trials were surveyed using the PRO-CTCAE. Symptomatic AEs were recorded by physicians using the CTCAE. A logistic regression model was used to assess associations between CTCAE grade and PRO responses., Results: Of 219 evaluable patients, 81 experienced a high-grade (3/4) clinician-reported symptom, and of these, only 32 (40%) and 26 (32%) patients concordantly reported these as either severe or very severe, and interfering with daily life either 'quite a bit' or 'very much', respectively. Of the 137 patients who experienced a low-grade (1/2) clinician-reported AE as their worst symptom, 98 (72%) and 118 (86%) patients concordantly reported these as either mild-moderate severity and minimally interfering with daily life, respectively. There was a statistically significant association between clinician-reported AE grade and interference. Interference scores were also associated with dose reductions., Conclusion: This is the first study to explore patient-reported severity and interference from symptomatic toxicities and compare clinician grading of the same toxicities. The study provided further evidence to support the added value of the PRO-CTCAE in Phase I oncology trials, which would make AE reporting patient-centred. Further work is needed to determine how this would affect the assessment of tolerability., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.)

A phase I trial (NCT03447314; 204686) evaluated the safety and efficacy of GSK1795091, a Toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4) agonist, in combination with immunotherapy (GSK3174998 [anti-OX40 monoclonal antibody], GSK3359609 [anti-ICOS monoclonal antibody], or pembrolizumab) in patients with solid tumors. The primary endpoint was safety; other endpoints included efficacy, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics (PD). Manufacturing of GSK1795091 formulation was modified during the trial to streamline production and administration, resulting in reduced PD (cytokine) activity. Fifty-four patients received GSK1795091 with a combination partner; 32 received only the modified GSK1795091 formulation, 15 received only the original formulation, and seven switched mid-study from the original to the modified formulation. Despite the modified formulation demonstrating higher systemic GSK1795091 exposure compared with the original formulation, the transient, dose-dependent elevations in cytokine and chemokine concentrations were no longer observed (e.g., IP-10, IL10, IL1-RA). Most patients (51/54; 94%) experienced ≥1 treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) during the study. Safety profiles were similar between formulations, but a higher incidence of TEAEs associated with immune responses (chills, fatigue, pyrexia, nausea, and vomiting) were observed with the original formulation. No conclusions can be made regarding GSK1795091 anti-tumor activity due to the limited data collected. Manufacturing changes were hypothesized to have caused the change in biological activity in this study. Structural characterization revealed GSK1795091 aggregate size in the modified formulation to be twice that in the original formulation, suggesting a negative correlation between GSK1795091 aggregate size and PD activity. This may have important clinical implications for future development of structurally similar compounds., (© 2022 The Authors. Clinical and Translational Science published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.)

CX-5461 is a G-quadruplex stabilizer that exhibits synthetic lethality in homologous recombination-deficient models. In this multicentre phase I trial in patients with solid tumors, 40 patients are treated across 10 dose levels (50-650 mg/m 2 ) to determine the recommended phase II dose (primary outcome), and evaluate safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (secondary outcomes). Defective homologous recombination is explored as a predictive biomarker of response. CX-5461 is generally well tolerated, with a recommended phase II dose of 475 mg/m 2 days 1, 8 and 15 every 4 weeks, and dose limiting phototoxicity. Responses are observed in 14% of patients, primarily in patients with defective homologous recombination. Reversion mutations in PALB2 and BRCA2 are detected on progression following initial response in germline carriers, confirming the underlying synthetic lethal mechanism. In vitro characterization of UV sensitization shows this toxicity is related to the CX-5461 chemotype, independent of G-quadruplex synthetic lethality. These results establish clinical proof-of-concept for this G-quadruplex stabilizer. Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02719977., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Purpose: To characterize safety and tolerability of the selective PI3Kβ inhibitor AZD8186, identify a recommended phase II dose (RP2D), and assess preliminary efficacy in combination with abiraterone acetate or vistusertib., Patients and Methods: This phase I open-label study included patients with advanced solid tumors, particularly prostate cancer, triple-negative breast cancer, and squamous non-small cell lung cancer. The study comprised four arms: (i) AZD8186 monotherapy dose finding; (ii) monotherapy dose expansion; (iii) AZD8186/abiraterone acetate (with prednisone); and (iv) AZD8186/vistusertib. The primary endpoints were safety, tolerability, and identification of the RP2D of AZD8186 monotherapy and in combination. Secondary endpoints included pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics, and tumor and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) responses., Results: In total, 161 patients were enrolled. AZD8186 was well tolerated across all study arms, the most common adverse events being gastrointestinal symptoms. In the monotherapy dose-finding arm, four patients experienced dose-limiting toxicities (mainly rash). AZD8186 doses of 60-mg twice daily [BID; 5 days on, 2 days off (5:2)] and 120-mg BID (continuous and 5:2 dosing) were taken into subsequent arms. The PKs of AZD8186 were dose proportional, without interactions with abiraterone acetate or vistusertib, and target inhibition was observed in plasma and tumor tissue. Monotherapy and combination therapy showed preliminary evidence of limited antitumor activity by imaging and, in prostate cancer, PSA reduction., Conclusions: AZD8186 monotherapy had an acceptable safety and tolerability profile, and combination with abiraterone acetate/prednisone or vistusertib was also tolerated. There was preliminary evidence of antitumor activity, meriting further exploration of AZD8186 in subsequent studies in PI3Kβ pathway-dependent cancers., (©2022 The Authors; Published by the American Association for Cancer Research.)

Background: Recent studies have demonstrated that T cells can induce vasodilation in a choline-acetyltransferase dependent manner, leading to an increase in T cell migration to infected tissues in response to viral infection, but its role in cancer is unclear. Choline acetyltransferase catalyzes the production of acetylcholine from choline and acetyl-CoA, however, acetylcholine is challenging to quantify due to its extremely short half-life while choline is stable. This study aims to correlate serum choline levels in patients with advanced solid tumors receiving pembrolizumab with treatment outcomes., Methods: Blood samples were collected at baseline and at week 7 (pre-cycle 3) in patients treated with pembrolizumab in the INvestigator-initiated Phase 2 Study of Pembrolizumab Immunological Response Evaluation phase II trial (NCT02644369). Samples were analyzed for choline and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA). Multivariable Cox models were used to assess the association between choline and overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) when including ΔctDNA C3 (the change in ctDNA from baseline to cycle 3), cohort, PD-L1 expression and tumor mutation burden (TMB). An independent validation cohort from the LIBERATE study (NCT03702309) included patients on early phase trials treated with a PD-1 inhibitor., Results: A total of 106 pts were included in the analysis. With a median follow-up of 12.6 months, median PFS and OS were 1.9 and 13.7 months, respectively. An increase in serum choline level at week 7 compared with baseline (Δcholine C3 ) in 81 pts was significantly associated with a better PFS (aHR 0.48, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.83, p=0.009), and a trend toward a better OS (aHR 0.64, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.12, p=0.119). A combination of ΔctDNA C3 and Δcholine C3 was prognostic for both OS and PFS. Multivariable analyses show Δcholine C3 was a prognostic factor for PFS independent of ΔctDNA C3 , cohort, PD-L1 and TMB. In the independent validation cohort (n=51), an increase in serum choline at cycle 2 was associated with a trend to improved PFS., Conclusions: This is the first exploratory report of serum choline levels in pan-cancer patients receiving pembrolizumab. The association between improved PFS and Δcholine C3 suggests a possible role for the cholinergic system in the regulation of antitumor immunity. Further pre-clinical and clinical studies are required to validate this finding., Trial Registration Number: NCT03702309., Competing Interests: Competing interests: ESG, W-JZ, ZAL, SCY, SL, SK, HB, SG, WX have no disclosures. GAW received travel grants from Bristol Myers Squibb and Abbvie, and honoraria from Pfizer. BW has received honoraria from AstraZeneca and Tessa Therapeutics. PLB: consulting/advisory (uncompensated) with Bristol-Myers Squibb, Seattle Genetics, Gilead, Merck, Pfizer, Amgen, Lilly; and institution receives clinical trials support from Novartis, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, Roche/Genentech, AstraZeneca, Merck, Amgen, Zymeworks, Seattle Genetics, Nektar Therapeutics, Lilly, and Bicara Therapeutics. MOB Ad boards: Merck, BMS, Novartis, Adaptimmune, GSK, Sanofi, LaRoche Possey, Sun Pharma, Instil Bio, IOVANCE, Pfizer. Grant funding: Merck, Takara Bio, Novartis. Safety Review Committee: Adaptimmune, GSK. Honoraria for talks: BMS, Novartis, Merck, Sanofi, Pfizer. SL is principal investigator and co-investigators of different industry-sponsor or investigated initiated trials. I received honoraria from AZ, GSK, Roche, Merck, Eisai and Shattuck labs. DC: Consulting/Advisory Boards: AstraZeneca, Dynamo Therapeutics, Eisai, Exact Sciences, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer and Roche. Research funding to institution: GlaxoSmithKline, Inivata, Merck, Pfizer, and Roche. Patent (US62/675,228) for methods of treating cancers characterized by a high expression level of spindle and kinetochore associated complex subunit 3 (ska3) gene. ARH reports institutional support for clinical trials conduct from Novartis, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pfizer, Boehringer-Ingelheim, GlaxoSmithKline, Roche/Genentech, Karyopharm, AstraZeneca/Medimmune, Merck, Astellas and Bayer; and compensated consulting/advisory boards for AstraZeneca, Merck and GlaxoSmithKline. AAR has received research funding from Roche, Genentech, Eli Lilly, Merck, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, AbbVie, Deciphera, Karyopharm, Astra Zeneca, Medimmune, Blueprint, Bristol Myers Squibb, GSK, Entremed/Casi Pharmaceuticals, Adaptimmune and BetaCat. He also has also served the advisory board for Eli Lilly, Merck, Adaptimmune, Boehringer Ingelheim. AS has served as an advisory board consultant for Merck (compensated), Bristol-Myers Squibb (compensated), Novartis (compensated), Oncorus (compensated), Janssen (compensated). She has also received research funding from Novartis, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Symphogen AstraZeneca/Medimmune, Merck, Bayer, Surface Oncology, Northern Biologics, Janssen Oncology/Johnson & Johnson, Roche, Regeneron, Alkermes, Array Biopharma, GSK. TWM Cofounder Treadwell Therapeutics. Stock ownership Agios Therapeutics Stock, Agios, Treadwell LS: consulting/advisory arrangements with Merck, Pfizer, Celgene, AstraZeneca, Morphosys, Roche, Oncorus, Symphogen, Seattle Genetics, GlaxoSmithKline, Voronoi, Arvinas, Tessa, Navire, Relay, Rubius, Janpix, Daiichi Sanyko; stock ownership of Agios (spouse); leadership position in Treadwell Therapeutics (spouse); and institution receives clinical trials support from Novartis, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pfizer, Boerhinger-Ingelheim, GlaxoSmithKline, Roche/Genentech, Karyopharm, AstraZeneca, Merck, Celgene, Astellas, Bayer, Abbvie, Amgen, Symphogen, Intensity Therapeutics, Mirati Therapeutics, Shattucks, Avid. EC: honoria from Bayer and Taiho; institution receives clinical trials support from Novartis, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Roche, AstraZeneca, Merck, 1Globe, Mirati Therapetuics, Zymeworks and Amgen., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Trametinib is an oral MEK 1/2 inhibitor, with a single agent recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of 2 mg daily (QD). This study was designed to evaluate RP2D, maximum tolerated dose (MTD), and pharmacokinetic (PK) profile of trametinib in patients with advanced solid tumors who had various degrees of hepatic dysfunction (HD)., Methods: Advanced cancer patients were stratified into 4 HD groups based on Organ Dysfunction Working Group hepatic function stratification criteria: normal (Norm), mild (Mild), moderate (Mod), severe (Sev). Dose escalation was based on "3 + 3" design within each HD group. PK samples were collected at cycle 1 days 15-16., Results: Forty-six patients were enrolled with 44 evaluable for safety [Norm=17, Mild=7, Mod (1.5 mg)=4, Mod (2 mg)=5, Sev (1 mg)=9, Sev (1.5 mg)=2] and 22 for PK analysis. Treatment related adverse events were consistent with prior trametinib studies. No treatment related deaths occurred. Dose limiting toxicities (DLTs) were evaluable in 15 patients (Mild=6, Mod (1.5 mg)=3, Mod (2 mg)=2, Sev (1 mg)=3 and Sev (1.5 mg)=1). One DLT (grade 3 acneiform rash) was observed in a Sev patient (1.5 mg). Dose interruptions or reductions due to treatment related adverse events occurred in 15 patients (34%) [Norm=9, 53%; Mild=2, 29%; Mod (1.5 mg)=1, 33%; Mod (2 mg)=2, 33%; Sev (1 mg)=1, 11%; Sev (1.5 mg)=1; 50%]. There were no significant differences across HD groups for all PK parameters when trametinib was normalized to 2 mg. However, only limited PK data were available for the Mod (n = 3) and Sev (n = 3) groups compared to Norm (n = 10) and Mild (n = 6) groups. Trametinib is heavily protein bound, with no correlation between serum albumin level and unbound trametinib fraction (p = 0.26)., Conclusions: RP2D for trametinib in Mild HD patients is 2 mg QD. There are insufficient number of evaluable patients due to difficulty of patient accrual to declare RP2D and MTD for Mod and Sev HD groups. DLTs were not observed in the highest dose cohorts that reached three evaluable patients - 1.5 mg QD in Mod group, and 1 mg QD in Sev group., Trial Registration: This study was registered in the ClinicalTrials.gov website ( NCT02070549 ) on February 25, 2014. ., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: Routine early palliative care (EPC) improves quality of life (QoL) for patients with advanced cancer, but it may not be necessary for all patients. We assessed the feasibility of Symptom screening with Targeted Early Palliative care (STEP) in a phase II trial., Methods: Patients with advanced cancer were recruited from medical oncology clinics. Symptoms were screened at each visit using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System-revised (ESAS-r); moderate to severe scores (screen-positive) triggered an email to a palliative care nurse, who called the patient and offered EPC. Patient-reported outcomes of QoL, depression, symptom control, and satisfaction with care were measured at baseline and at 2, 4, and 6 months. The primary aim was to determine feasibility, according to predefined criteria. Secondary aims were to assess whether STEP identified patients with worse patient-reported outcomes and whether screen-positive patients who accepted and received EPC had better outcomes over time than those who did not receive EPC., Results: In total, 116 patients were enrolled, of which 89 (77%) completed screening for ≥70% of visits. Of the 70 screen-positive patients, 39 (56%) received EPC during the 6-month study and 4 (6%) received EPC after the study end. Measure completion was 76% at 2 months, 68% at 4 months, and 63% at 6 months. Among screen-negative patients, QoL, depression, and symptom control were substantially better than for screen-positive patients at baseline (all P<.0001) and remained stable over time. Among screen-positive patients, mood and symptom control improved over time for those who accepted and received EPC and worsened for those who did not receive EPC (P<.01 for trend over time), with no difference in QoL or satisfaction with care., Conclusions: STEP is feasible in ambulatory patients with advanced cancer and distinguishes between patients who remain stable without EPC and those who benefit from targeted EPC. Acceptance of the triggered EPC visit should be encouraged., Clinicaltrials: gov identifier: NCT04044040.

Serial circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) monitoring is emerging as a non-invasive strategy to predict and monitor immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) therapeutic efficacy across cancer types. Yet, limited data exist to show the relationship between ctDNA dynamics and tumor genome and immune microenvironment in patients receiving ICB. Here, we present an in-depth analysis of clinical, whole-exome, transcriptome, and ctDNA profiles of 73 patients with advanced solid tumors, across 30 cancer types, from a phase II basket clinical trial of pembrolizumab (NCT02644369) and report changes in genomic and immune landscapes (primary outcomes). Patients stratified by ctDNA and tumor burden dynamics correspond with survival and clinical benefit. High mutation burden, high expression of immune signatures, and mutations in BRCA2 are associated with pembrolizumab molecular sensitivity, while abundant copy-number alterations and B2M loss-of-heterozygosity corresponded with resistance. Upon treatment, induction of genes expressed by T cell, B cell, and myeloid cell populations are consistent with sensitivity and resistance. We identified the upregulated expression of PLA2G2D, an immune-regulating phospholipase, as a potential biomarker of adaptive resistance to ICB. Together, these findings provide insights into the diversity of immunogenomic mechanisms that underpin pembrolizumab outcomes., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Background: Clinician reporting of symptomatic adverse events (AEs) in phase I trials uses the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE). The utility of the patient-reported outcomes (PROs) version of the CTCAE (PRO-CTCAE) in this setting is unknown. This prospective, observational study compared patient- and clinician-reported symptomatic AEs in phase I patients., Methods: Phase I study-eligible patients at Princess Margaret were surveyed with the PRO-CTCAE full-item library (78 symptomatic AEs) at baseline (BL), mid-cycle 1, and mid-cycle 2 (C2). Patient and trial characteristics, best response, and survival data were collected. Presence or absence of patient- (PRO-CTCAE) or clinician-reported symptomatic AEs were compared (kappa) at defined timepoints and overall (BL+ mid-cycle 1 + C2)., Results: Of 292 patients approached from May 2017 to January 2019, a total of 265 (90.8%) were consented, with 243 (91.7%) evaluable and 552 PRO-CTCAE surveys (completion rate = 98.7%) included in analyses. Evaluation of overall patient-reported symptomatic AEs identified 50 PRO-CTCAE and 11 CTCAE items with 10% or greater reporting frequency. Nineteen CTCAE items were reported as 1% or less despite matched PRO-CTCAE items reporting as 10% or greater. Underreported categories included sexual health, bodily emissions, and cognition. Clinician- relative to patient-reporting frequency (ratio) demonstrated 9 symptomatic AEs with a 50-fold or more lower clinician reporting rate. Overall patient-clinician agreement for individual symptomatic AEs ranged from poor (κ = 0.00-0.19) to moderate (κ = 0.40-0.59), with discordance driven by lack of clinician reporting. Dyspnea (κ = 0.54) and peripheral neuropathy (κ = 0.63) at BL and limb edema (κ = 0.55) at C2 demonstrated the highest patient-clinician agreement., Conclusions: Poor to moderate patient-clinician agreement for symptomatic AEs suggests clinician underreporting in phase I trials. Analyses of severity and interference PRO categories are ongoing., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: There are limited data regarding the quality of patient-reported outcome (PRO) data in immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) clinical trial publications., Methods: A systematic search of citations from various databases was conducted to identify prospective clinical trials involving ICI in advanced tumors from 2003 to 2020. A 30-point score was adapted from the CONSORT PRO extension statement to assess adherence to CONSORT PRO reporting. Linear regression was used to identify factors associated with quality reporting., Results: After the review of 8058 articles, 33 trials were included with ICIs as either monotherapy (91%) or part of a combination regimen (9%). The median score was 23.5 points (range 15-29). In the majority of cases (82%), PROs were reported in a separate publication from the original study. Most of the trials were conducted in the metastatic setting and predominantly in melanoma, lung, and renal cell carcinoma (RCC) (73%). Univariate analysis revealed that trials with greater than 250 patients were associated with a higher score. The score was more likely to be lower in disease sites other than melanoma, lung, and RCC and was higher in the KEYNOTE than in the CHECKMATE trial series. There was no significant correlation between the score and whether a trial met its primary end-point or if the trial improved or worsened the quality of life. In the multivariate analysis, the number of patients enrolled to the trial, disease site, and trial series remained significant., Conclusions: The quality of reporting of PROs in ICI phase II and III clinical trials is heterogeneous across various cancer sites. As PRO data are increasingly used to counsel patients and complement clinical decision making, innovative and collaborative efforts are required to improve the reporting of these essential data., (© 2021 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Immuno-oncology therapies have been approved for various solid tumors; however, the high cost of these treatments and their potential toxicities require a thorough assessment of their risks and benefits. Collection of data directly from patients through patient-reported outcome instruments can improve the precision and reliability of adverse event detection, assess tolerability of adverse events, and provide an evaluation of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) changes from immuno-oncology therapies. There is robust development in HRQOL tools specifically for patients treated with immuno-oncology agents. This review examines the history and basic concepts of HRQOL and patient-reported outcome assessments commonly used in oncological trials, highlighting the strengths and weaknesses of current approaches when applied to immunotherapies, as well as some of the current efforts to develop tools for this field and opportunities for future research. LAY SUMMARY: Immuno-oncology (IO) therapies are costly and carry potential toxicities known as immune-related adverse events. Evaluation of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) can impact the risk-benefit assessment of IO therapies. Integration of HRQOL end points and patient-reported outcome data for IO therapies are urgently needed. Ongoing robust development of patient-reported outcome tools specific to IO therapies are currently underway and will permit the evaluation of HRQOL for IO agents. Improvement in precision and reliability of HRQOL evaluation will enhance the ultimate true value of these expensive and effective drugs., (© 2021 American Cancer Society.)

Background: The correlation between blood-based tumor mutation burden (bTMB) and tissue-based tumor mutation burden(tTMB) has not been broadly tested in a multicancer cohort. Here, we assess the correlation between bTMB with tTMB in phase I trial patients treated with immunotherapy. As an exploratory analysis, we evaluated circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) dynamics in responders., Methods: Patients treated with immunotherapy at the Princess Margaret phase I trials unit were enrolled. Pretreatment plasma ctDNA and matched normal blood controls were collected. Available archival tissue formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) samples were analyzed. A 425-gene panel was used to sequence both ctDNA and FFPE samples. Samples with TMB within the highest tertile were considered as high TMB., Results: Thirty-eight patients were accrued from 25 different trials, 86.8% of which involved an anti-PD-1/PD-L1 agent. Thirty patients (78.9%) had detectable mutations in ctDNA, of which the median (range) bTMB was 5 (1-53) mutations per megabase (mut/Mb). Of the 22 patients with available FFPE samples, mutations were detected in 21 (95.4%); the median (range) tTMB was 6 (2-124) mut/Mb. Among the 16 patients with detectable mutations in both FFPE and ctDNA, a statistically significant correlation between bTMB and tTMB was observed ( ρ  = 0.71; P  = .002). High TMB was not associated with better survival. All 3 responders had a decrease in the variant allele frequency of mutations detected in ctDNA at a second timepoint relative to baseline, indicating a potential early marker of response., Conclusions: In this small series, bTMB correlated with tTMB. An on-treatment decrease in VAF of mutations detected in ctDNA at baseline was observed in responders. Larger studies to verify our findings are warranted., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) provides clinical benefit to a subset of patients with cancer. However, existing biomarkers do not reliably predict treatment response across diverse cancer types. Limited data exist to show how serial circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) testing may perform as a predictive biomarker in patients receiving ICB. We conducted a prospective phase II clinical trial to assess ctDNA in five distinct cohorts of patients with advanced solid tumors treated with pembrolizumab (NCT02644369). We applied bespoke ctDNA assays to 316 serial plasma samples obtained at baseline and every three cycles from 94 patients. Baseline ctDNA concentration correlated with progression-free survival, overall survival, clinical response and clinical benefit. This association became stronger when considering ctDNA kinetics during treatment. All 12 patients with ctDNA clearance during treatment were alive with median 25 months follow up. This study demonstrates the potential for broad clinical utility of ctDNA-based surveillance in patients treated with ICB., (© 2020. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature America, Inc.)

The development of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) represents a major milestone in immune-oncology. Over the years these agents have demonstrated efficacy in an increasing array of malignancies. Despite this success however, significant challenges remain. Novel approaches to both drug development and trial design are required to incorporate the unique pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of ICIs. Further, it has also been established that the benefit of ICIs is limited to only a subset of patients. The molecular interactions between native immune cells and tumorigenesis and progression represent an active area of biomarker research, and elucidating the mechanisms of response and resistance is crucial to develop rational trial designs for the next wave of immune-oncology (IO) clinical trials, particularly in patients with primary and/or acquired resistance. Efforts are now being made to integrate both biological and clinical information using novel multi-omic approaches which are now being developed to further elucidate the molecular signatures associated with IO treatment response and resistance and enable rational drug development and trial design processes. As such, precision IO and the ability to deliver patient-specific choices for ICI monotherapies or combination therapies has become an increasingly tangible goal. We herein describe the current landscape in ICI drug development and discuss the challenges and future directions in this exciting and evolving era in immune-oncology., (© 2020 The British Pharmacological Society.)

Background: Validated biomarkers are needed to identify patients at increased risk of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) to immune checkpoint blockade (ICB). Antibodies directed against endogenous antigens can change after exposure to ICB. Methods: Patients with different solid tumors stratified into cohorts received pembrolizumab every 3 weeks in a Phase II trial (INSPIRE study). Blood samples were collected prior to first pembrolizumab exposure (baseline) and approximately 7 weeks (pre-cycle 3) into treatment. In a discovery analysis, autoantibody target immuno-mass spectrometry was performed in baseline and pre-cycle 3 pooled sera of 24 INSPIRE patients based on clinical benefit (CBR) and irAEs. Results: Thyroglobulin (Tg) and thyroid peroxidase (TPO) were identified as the candidate autoantibody targets. In the overall cohort of 78 patients, the frequency of CBR and irAEs from pembrolizumab was 31% and 24%, respectively. Patients with an anti-Tg titer increase ≥1.5x from baseline to pre-cycle 3 were more likely to have irAEs relative to patients without this increase in unadjusted, cohort adjusted, and multivariable models (OR=17.4, 95% CI 1.8-173.8, p=0.015). Similarly, patients with an anti-TPO titer ≥ 1.5x from baseline to pre-cycle 3 were more likely to have irAEs relative to patients without the increase in unadjusted and cohort adjusted (OR=6.1, 95% CI 1.1-32.7, p=0.035) models. Further, the cohort adjusted analysis showed patients with anti-Tg titer greater than median (10.0 IU/mL) at pre-cycle 3 were more likely to have irAEs (OR=4.7, 95% CI 1.2-17.8, p=0.024). Patients with pre-cycle 3 anti-TPO titers greater than median (10.0 IU/mL) had a significant difference in overall survival (23.8 vs 11.5 months; HR=1.8, 95% CI 1.0-3.2, p=0.05). Conclusions: Patient increase ≥1.5x of anti-Tg and anti-TPO titers from baseline to pre-cycle 3 were associated with irAEs from pembrolizumab, and patients with elevated pre-cycle 3 anti-TPO titers had an improvement in overall survival., Competing Interests: Competing interests: MM, AS, IB, IP and MP have no competing interests. MI has Honoraria with Merck and CompassMD. ARH has conducted advisory/consulting/research for Genentech/Roche, Merck, GSK, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis, Boston Biomedical, Boehringer-Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Medimmune. PLB has conducted research for Bristol-Myers Squibb, Sanofi, AstraZeneca, Genentech/Roche, SERVIER, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, SignalChem, PTC Therapeutics, Nektar, Merck, Seattle Genetics, Mersana, Immunomedics, Lilly. SL has honoraria from AstraZeneca and Merck. AS has conducted consultancy/research for Merck, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis, Oncorus, Symphogen, AstraZeneca/Medimmune, Bayer, Surface Oncology, Northern Biologics, Janssen Oncology/Johnston & Johnston, Roche, Regeneron. AAR has honoraria and has consulted for for Boehringer Ingelheim, Lilly, Merck, CASI Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, Deciphera, Karyopharm Therapeutics, Pfizer, Roche/Genentech, Boston Biomedical, Bristol-Myers Squibb, MedImmune, Amgen, GlaxoSmithKline, Blueprint Medicines, Merck, Abbvie, Adaptimmune. LLS has conducted consulting/research for Merck, Pfizer, Celgene, AstraZeneca/Medimmune, Morphosys, Roche, GeneSeeq, Loxo, Oncorus, Symphogen, Seattle Genetics, GSK, Voronoi, Novartis, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boerhinger-Ingelheim, GlaxoSmithKline, Roche/Genentech, Karyopharm, Astellas, Bayer, Abbvie, Amgen, Intensity Therapeutics, Mirati, Shattucksm Avid. Stock owner in Agios., (Copyright: © 2020 Music M et al.)

Background: Minimal qualitative data exist on the experiences of cancer patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors or costimulatory antibodies. Understanding the day to day experiences of patients being treated with immune checkpoint modulators, and how these relate to their health-related quality of life, can inform future research and lead to better clinical decision-making and care. We report here the first in depth qualitative study to consider patients' diverse and complex experiences with immune checkpoint modulators, with a focus on side effects and how these impact daily life., Methods: This single-center qualitative study was based on focus groups and semistructured interviews. Patients who were being treated or who had been treated with immune checkpoint modulators within the last year for a range of cancer diagnoses were recruited. Interpretive description informed our inductive, iterative approach to analysis., Results: Eight themes were identified, characterizing the complexity of these patients' lived experiences: major categories of side effects experienced and how they impacted patient well-being; the heterogeneous nature of side effects experienced; living with uncertainty; reframing the meaning and severity of SEs; focus on survival, hope, and being positive; acceptance and adaptation; feeling supported; and faith in medical innovation. Throughout their accounts, participants highlighted the profound impact that immune checkpoint modulators had on their daily lives., Conclusion: This is the first in-depth qualitative study into patient accounts of their experiences of treatment with immune checkpoint modulators, related side effects, and how it impacted their daily lives. This research is an integral initial step in developing an instrument that will assess treatment-related side effects in patients treated with this form of therapy., (© 2020 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Patients with cancer who are treated with immune checkpoint modulators (ICMs) have their health-related quality of life (HRQOL) measured using general patient-reported outcome (PRO) tools. To the authors' knowledge, no instrument has been developed to date specifically for patients treated with ICMs. The objective of the current study was to develop a toxicity subscale PRO instrument for patients treated with ICMs to assess HRQOL., Methods: Input was collected from a systematic review as well as patients and physicians experienced with ICM treatment. Descriptive thematic analysis was used to evaluate the qualitative data obtained from patient focus groups and interviews, which informed an initial list of items that described ICM side effects and their impact on HRQOL. These inputs informed item generation and/or reduction to develop a toxicity subscale., Results: Focus groups and individual interviews with 37 ICM-treated patients generated an initial list of 176 items. After a first round of item reduction that produced a shortened list of 76 items, 16 physicians who care for patients who are treated with ICMs were surveyed with a list of 49 patient-reported side effects and 11 physicians participated in follow-up interviews. A second round of item reduction was informed by the physician responses to produce a list of 25 items., Conclusions: To the authors' knowledge, this 25-item list is the first HRQOL-focused toxicity subscale for patients treated with ICMs and was developed in accordance with US Food and Drug Administration guidelines, which prioritize patient input in developing PRO tools. The subscale will be combined with the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) to form the FACT-ICM. Prior to recommending the formal use of this PRO instrument, the authors will evaluate its validity and reliability in longitudinal studies involving substantially more patients., (© 2019 American Cancer Society.)

Purpose: Genomes of tumors that are deficient in DNA mismatch repair (dMMR) have high microsatellite instability (MSI-H) and harbor hundreds to thousands of somatic mutations that encode potential neoantigens. Such tumors are therefore likely to be immunogenic, triggering upregulation of immune checkpoint proteins. Pembrolizumab, an anti‒programmed death-1 monoclonal antibody, has antitumor activity against MSI-H/dMMR cancer. We report data from the phase II KEYNOTE-158 study of pembrolizumab in patients with previously treated, advanced noncolorectal MSI-H/dMMR cancer., Patients and Methods: Eligible patients with histologically/cytologically confirmed MSI-H/dMMR advanced noncolorectal cancer who experienced failure with prior therapy received pembrolizumab 200 mg once every 3 weeks for 2 years or until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or patient withdrawal. Radiologic imaging was performed every 9 weeks for the first year of therapy and every 12 weeks thereafter. The primary end point was objective response rate per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1, as assessed by independent central radiologic review., Results: Among 233 enrolled patients, 27 tumor types were represented, with endometrial, gastric, cholangiocarcinoma, and pancreatic cancers being the most common. Median follow up was 13.4 months. Objective response rate was 34.3% (95% CI, 28.3% to 40.8%). Median progression-free survival was 4.1 months (95% CI, 2.4 to 4.9 months) and median overall survival was 23.5 months (95% CI, 13.5 months to not reached). Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 151 patients (64.8%). Thirty-four patients (14.6%) had grade 3 to 5 treatment-related adverse events. Grade 5 pneumonia occurred in one patient; there were no other treatment-related fatal adverse events., Conclusion: Our study demonstrates the clinical benefit of anti-programmed death-1 therapy with pembrolizumab among patients with previously treated unresectable or metastatic MSI-H/dMMR noncolorectal cancer. Toxicity was consistent with previous experience of pembrolizumab monotherapy.

The human microbiome is an emerging target in cancer development and therapeutics. It may be directly oncogenic, through promotion of mucosal inflammation or systemic dysregulation, or may alter anti-cancer immunity/therapy. Microorganisms within, adjacent to and distant from tumors may affect cancer progression, and interactions and differences between these populations can influence the course of disease. Here we review the microbiome as it pertains to cancer for clinicians. The microbiota of cancers including colorectal, pancreas, breast and prostate are discussed. We examine "omics" technologies, microbiota associated with tumor tissue and tumor-site fluids such as feces and urine, as well as indirect effects of the gut microbiome. We describe roles of the microbiome in immunotherapy, and how it can be modulated to improve cancer therapeutics. While research is still at an early stage, there is potential to exploit the microbiome, as modulation may increase efficacy of treatments, reduce toxicities and prevent carcinogenesis., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

The patient-reported outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) complements capture of symptomatic adverse events (AEs) by clinicians. Previous trials have typically used a limited subset of relevant symptomatic AEs to reduce patient burden. We aimed to determine the feasibility of administering all 80 AEs included in the PRO-CTCAE library by approaching consecutive patients enrolled in a large academic phase I program at three points in time. Here, we report a preplanned analysis after enrolling the first 20 patients. All items were answered on 51 of 56 potential visits (adherence 91%). Three (5%) additional PRO-CTCAE assessments were partially completed, and two (4%) were missed because of conflicting appointments. No patient withdrew consent or chose not to complete the assessments once enrolled on study. Future trials of experimental drugs that incorporate the PRO-CTCAE should consider using this unselected approach to identify adverse events more completely., Competing Interests: Disclosures of potential conflicts of interest may be found at the end of this article., (© AlphaMed Press 2019.)

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) demonstrate unprecedented efficacy in multiple malignancies; however, the mechanisms of sensitivity and resistance are poorly understood and predictive biomarkers are scarce. INSPIRE is a phase 2 basket study to evaluate the genomic and immune landscapes of peripheral blood and tumors following pembrolizumab treatment., Methods: Patients with incurable, locally advanced or metastatic solid tumors that have progressed on standard therapy, or for whom no standard therapy exists or standard therapy was not deemed appropriate, received 200 mg pembrolizumab intravenously every three weeks. Blood and tissue samples were collected at baseline, during treatment, and at progression. One core biopsy was used for immunohistochemistry and the remaining cores were pooled and divided for genomic and immune analyses. Univariable analysis of clinical, genomic, and immunophenotyping parameters was conducted to evaluate associations with treatment response in this exploratory analysis., Results: Eighty patients were enrolled from March 21, 2016 to June 1, 2017, and 129 tumor and 382 blood samples were collected. Immune biomarkers were significantly different between the blood and tissue. T cell PD-1 was blocked (≥98%) in the blood of all patients by the third week of treatment. In the tumor, 5/11 (45%) and 11/14 (79%) patients had T cell surface PD-1 occupance at weeks six and nine, respectively. The proportion of genome copy number alterations and abundance of intratumoral 4-1BB+ PD-1+ CD8 T cells at baseline (P < 0.05), and fold-expansion of intratumoral CD8 T cells from baseline to cycle 2-3 (P < 0.05) were associated with treatment response., Conclusion: This study provides technical feasibility data for correlative studies. Tissue biopsies provide distinct data from the blood and may predict response to pembrolizumab.

Background: Immunotherapy (IO) agents can cause late-onset immune-related adverse events (irAEs). In phase I trials, observation for dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) is typically limited to the first cycle. The incidence of delayed-onset DLTs and their potential impact on dose determination have not been fully elucidated., Patients and Methods: Consecutive patients enrolled in early phase IO trials at Princess Margaret Cancer Centre between August 2012 and September 2016 were retrospectively reviewed, applying trial-specific definitions for DLTs. A clinically significant AE (csAE) was defined as a treatment-related adverse event requiring corticosteroids, hormone replacement, IO delay or discontinuation., Results: A total of 352 consecutive trial enrolments in 21 early phase clinical trials were included. Two-hundred seventy-eight patients (79%) received monotherapy and 74 (21%) received combination IO. Two hundred sixty (74%) patients experienced irAEs. There were two protocol-defined DLTs. Twenty (5.7%) patients had 24 csAEs qualifying as DLTs except for occurrence after the protocol-specified DLT period. One-hundred and six (10%) of irAEs were csAEs, including endocrine (26%), respiratory (14%), gastrointestinal (11%), general (10%), dermatological (8%), hepatic (8%), musculoskeletal (6%), pancreatic (6%), haematological, metabolic, neurological, cardiac (each 2%), infective and ocular (each 1%) events. The highest risk of first-onset csAE was during the first 4 weeks compared with the period from 4 weeks to end of treatment (odds ratio 3.13, 95% confidence interval 1.95-5.02). The median time to first onset csAE was significantly shorter with combination than monotherapy IO (32 vs. 146 days, P < 0.001)., Conclusions: In our series of early phase IO trials, the risk of csAE was highest during the initial 4 weeks on IO treatment, supporting the use of the conventional DLT period for dose escalation decision. However, there were 24 clinically significant late-onset DLTs in 5.7% of patients. Combination IO was associated with greater risk of and also earlier onset for csAE, which may need to be considered for early phase trial design., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) targeting cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA-4), programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) or its ligand (PD-L1) produce unique toxicity profiles. The objective of this review was to identify patterns and incidence of immune-related adverse events (irAE) based on tumour type and ICI class., Methods: Medline, EMBASE and COCHRANE databases were searched to identify prospective monotherapy trials of ICIs from 2003 to November 2015. Paired reviewers selected studies for inclusion and extracted data. Odds ratio (OR), χ2 tests and multivariable regression models were used to analyse for effect size and associations., Results: We identified 48 trials (6938 patients), including 26 CTLA-4, 17 PD-1, 2 PD-L1 trials, and 3 studies tested both CTLA-4 and PD-1. Grade 3/4 irAE were more common with CTLA-4 mAbs compared with PD-1 (31% versus 10%). All grades colitis (OR 8.7, 95% CI 5.8-12.9), hypophysitis (OR 6.5, 95% CI 3.0-14.3) and rash (OR 2.0, 95% CI 1.8-2.3) were more frequent with CTLA-4 mAbs; whereas pneumonitis (OR 6.4, 95% CI 3.2-12.7), hypothyroidism (OR 4.3, 95% CI 2.9-6.3), arthralgia (OR 3.5, 95% CI 2.6-4.8) and vitiligo (OR 3.5, 95% CI 2.3-5.3) were more common with PD-1 mAbs. Comparison of irAE from the three most studied tumour types in PD-1 mAbs trials [melanoma (n = 2048), non-small-cell lung cancer (n = 1030) and renal cell carcinoma (n = 573)] showed melanoma patients had a higher frequency of gastrointestinal and skin irAE and lower frequency of pneumonitis., Discussion: CTLA-4 and PD-1 mAbs have distinct irAE profiles. Different immune microenvironments may drive histology-specific irAE patterns. Other tumour-dependent irAE profiles may be identified as data emerge from ICI trials., (© The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of race, cancer history, and their interaction on emotional distress among a nationally representative sample of US adults. Data utilized for this analysis were obtained from the first, second, and fourth iterations of the fourth cycle of the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS). The study sample included 3959, 3630, and 3677 respondents for the years 2011, 2012, and 2014, respectively, for a total sample size of 11,266. A multivariable ordered logistic regression model was used to assess the relationship between emotional distress, race, and cancer history. The effect of cancer history on emotional distress was found to be moderated by race. Specifically, emotional distress was significantly higher among African American cancer survivors. Factors found to be protective against emotional distress included healthy lifestyle, older age, and higher income. Factors associated with high levels of emotional distress included poor general health status, low self-efficacy, and being female. The authors recommend the design, advancement, and implementation of evidence-based culturally sensitive interventions aimed at effectively screening and managing psychological distress symptoms, particularly among African American long-term cancer survivor patient populations.

Background: The recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of anticancer agents is determined traditionally by dose-limiting toxicities. Nontoxicity or biological endpoints such as pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and efficacy can also be used to identify RP2D, which may be relevant to molecularly targeted agents (MTAs)., Methods: A systematic review identified all monotherapy phase 1 studies of MTAs in solid tumors published between 2001 and 2013. Dose, dosing schedule, and determinants of RP2D were collected from each study. A supplementary search of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) website identified the licensed dose for drugs with regulatory approval. Logistic regression was used to explore predictors for the RP2D being consistent with the final approved dose., Results: The search identified 4175 records, of which 250 studies evaluating 181 individual MTAs were included. Of these MTAs, 161 (64%) determined an RP2D. Fifty-two trials (32%), used toxicity alone to specify an RP2D. The remaining trials used a nonclassical approach with either multiple endpoints that included toxicity (n = 87, 54%), multiple nontoxicity endpoints (n = 12, 7%), or a single nontoxicity endpoint (n = 10, 6%). Twenty-nine (16%) MTAs were approved by the FDA for solid tumor indications. The use of nonclassical definitions compared with toxicity alone was significantly associated with higher likelihood of FDA approval (odds ratio, 5.03; 95% confidence interval, 1.11-22.73; P = .036)., Conclusions: In the past decade, there has been a dominance of a nonclassical approach using multiple endpoints with or without toxicity or single nontoxicity endpoints to define RPTD in MTA monotherapy phase 1 trials. Nonclassically defined RP2Ds for MTAs appear to be associated with a higher rate of FDA drug approval. Cancer 2017;123:1409-1415. © 2016 American Cancer Society., (© 2017 American Cancer Society.)

Background: The clinical utility of molecular profiling of tumor tissue to guide treatment of patients with advanced solid tumors is unknown. Our objectives were to evaluate the frequency of genomic alterations, clinical "actionability" of somatic variants, enrollment in mutation-targeted or other clinical trials, and outcome of molecular profiling for advanced solid tumor patients at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (PM)., Methods: Patients with advanced solid tumors aged ≥18 years, good performance status, and archival tumor tissue available were prospectively consented. DNA from archival formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumor tissue was tested using a MALDI-TOF MS hotspot panel or a targeted next generation sequencing (NGS) panel. Somatic variants were classified according to clinical actionability and an annotated report included in the electronic medical record. Oncologists were provided with summary tables of their patients' molecular profiling results and available mutation-specific clinical trials. Enrolment in genotype-matched versus genotype-unmatched clinical trials following release of profiling results and response by RECIST v1.1 criteria were evaluated., Results: From March 2012 to July 2014, 1893 patients were enrolled and 1640 tested. After a median follow-up of 18 months, 245 patients (15 %) who were tested were subsequently treated on 277 therapeutic clinical trials, including 84 patients (5 %) on 89 genotype-matched trials. The overall response rate was higher in patients treated on genotype-matched trials (19 %) compared with genotype-unmatched trials (9 %; p < 0.026). In a multi-variable model, trial matching by genotype (p = 0.021) and female gender (p = 0.034) were the only factors associated with increased likelihood of treatment response., Conclusions: Few advanced solid tumor patients enrolled in a prospective institutional molecular profiling trial were treated subsequently on genotype-matched therapeutic trials. In this non-randomized comparison, genotype-enrichment of early phase clinical trials was associated with an increased objective tumor response rate., Trial Registration: NCT01505400 (date of registration 4 January 2012).

Purpose: Interpretation systems for clinical laboratory reporting of genetic variants for inherited conditions have been widely published. By contrast, there are no existing systems for interpretation and classification of somatic variants found from molecular testing of cancer., Methods: We designed an assessment protocol and classification system for somatic variants identified through next-generation sequencing molecular profiling of tumor-derived samples and applied these to a pilot dataset of somatic variants found by next-generation sequencing profiling of 158 tumor samples derived from advanced cancer patients examined at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre., Results: We present a classification system to interpret the significance of genetic variants in molecular analysis of cancer, including the following key factors: (i) known or predicted pathogenicity of the variant; (ii) primary site and tumor histology in which the variant is found; (iii) recurrence of the variant; and (iv) evidence of clinical actionability. We used these factors to develop a five-category somatic variant classification for simplified reporting of variant interpretations to treating oncologists., Conclusion: Our somatic variant classification can be of practical value to other clinical molecular laboratories performing cancer genetic profiling by promoting consistent reporting of somatic variants and permitting harmonization of variant data among laboratories and clinical studies.

Background: There are limited data about the quality of immune-related adverse event (irAE) reporting in immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) clinical trial publications., Methods: A systematic search of citations from Medline, EMBASE and Cochrane databases identified prospective clinical trials involving ICIs in advanced solid tumors from 2003 to 2013. A 21-point quality score (QS) was adapted from the CONSORT harms extension statement. Linear regression was used to identify factors associated with quality reporting., Results: After a review of 2628 articles, 50 trial reports were included, with ICIs as either monotherapy (54%) or part of a combination regimen (46%). The mean QS was 11.21 points (range 3.50-17.50 points). The median grade 3/4 AE rate reported was 21% (range 0%-66%) and 29/50 (58%) trials concluded that irAEs were tolerable. Multivariate regression analysis revealed that year of publication (within last 5 years, P = 0.01) and journal impact factor >15 (P = 0.004) were associated with higher QS. Complete reporting of specific characteristics of irAEs including onset, management and reversibility were reported by 14%, 8% and 6% of studies, respectively. The incidence of grade 3/4 adverse events was higher for inhibitors against CTLA-4 compared with other immune checkpoints (P < 0.001)., Conclusions: The reporting of irAEs is suboptimal. A standardized reporting method of irAEs that accounts for tolerability, management and reversibility is needed and would enable a more precise evaluation of the therapeutic risk benefit ratio of ICIs., (© The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: First-in-human (FIH) trials of low-molecular-weight anticancer agents conventionally derive a safe start dose (SD) from one-tenth the severely toxic dose in 10% of rodents or one-sixth the highest nonseverely toxic dose (HNSTD) in nonrodent species. No consensus has been reached on whether this paradigm can be safely applied to biotechnology-derived products (BDPs)., Materials and Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted to identify all BDPs (excluding immune checkpoint inhibitors and antibody drug conjugates) with sufficient nonclinical and clinical data to assess the safety of hypothetical use of one-sixth HNSTD in an advanced cancer FIH trial., Results: The search identified 23 BDPs, of which 21 were monoclonal antibodies. The median ratio of the maximum tolerated or maximum administered dose (MTD or MAD) to the actual FIH SD was 36 (range, 8-500). Only 2 BDPs reached the MTD. Hypothetical use of one-sixth HNSTD (allometrically scaled to humans) would not have exceeded the MTD or MAD for all 23 BDPs and would have reduced the median ratio of the MTD or MAD to a SD to 6.1 (range, 3.5-55.3). Pharmacodynamic (PD) markers were included in some animal toxicology studies and were useful to confirm the hypothetical SD of one-sixth HNSTD., Conclusion: One-sixth HNSTD would not have resulted in unacceptable toxicities in the data available. Supporting its use could reduce the number of dose escalations needed to reach the recommended dose. A low incidence of toxicities in animals and humans underscores the need to identify the pharmacokinetic and PD parameters to guide SD selection of BDPs for FIH cancer trials., Implications for Practice: Start dose (SD) for biotechnology-derived products (BDPs) can be safely derived from one-sixth the highest nonseverely toxic dose in nonrodent species and may reduce the number of dose escalations needed to reach the recommended dose in first-in-human studies while limiting unnecessary exposure to high drug levels in humans. The use of this type of SD could improve the design of phase I studies of BDPs by making them more efficient. The role of preclinical pharmacodynamic markers was useful in confirming the hypothetical SD, and attempts should be explored in future animal studies to identify such parameters., (©AlphaMed Press.)

The purpose of early stage clinical trials is to determine the recommended dose and toxicity profile of an investigational agent or multi-drug combination. Molecularly targeted agents (MTAs) and immunotherapies have distinct toxicities from chemotherapies that are often not dose dependent and can lead to chronic and sometimes unpredictable side effects. Therefore utilizing a dose escalation method that has toxicity based endpoints may not be as appropriate for determination of recommended dose, and alternative parameters such as pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic outcomes are potentially appealing options. Approaches to enhance safety and optimize dosing include improved preclinical models and assessment, innovative model based design and dose escalation strategies, patient selection, the use of expansion cohorts and extended toxicity assessments. Tailoring the design of phase I trials by adopting new strategies to address the different properties of MTAs is required to enhance the development of these agents. This review will focus on the limitations to safety and dose determination that have occurred in the development of MTAs and immunotherapies. In addition, strategies are proposed to overcome these challenges to develop phase I trials that can more accurately define the recommended dose and identify adverse events., (Copyright © 2014 Federation of European Biochemical Societies. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Recent therapeutic advances in oncology have been driven by the identification of tumour genotype variations between patients, called interpatient heterogeneity, that predict the response of patients to targeted treatments. Subpopulations of cancer cells with unique genomes in the same patient may exist across different geographical regions of a tumour or evolve over time, called intratumour heterogeneity. Sequencing technologies can be used to characterize intratumour heterogeneity at diagnosis, monitor clonal dynamics during treatment and identify the emergence of clinical resistance during disease progression. Genetic interpatient and intratumour heterogeneity can pose challenges for the design of clinical trials that use these data.