Search

Purpose Entrectinib is a central nervous system-active potent inhibitor of tropomyosin receptor kinase (TRK), with anti-tumor activity against neurotrophic NTRK gene fusion-positive tumors. This study investigates the pharmacokinetics of entrectinib and its active metabolite (M5) in pediatric patients and aims to understand whether the pediatric dose of 300 mg/m2 once daily (QD) provides an exposure that is consistent with the approved adult dose (600 mg QD). Methods Forty-three patients aged from birth to 22 years were administered entrectinib (250–750 mg/m2 QD) orally with food in 4-week cycles. Entrectinib formulations included capsules without acidulant (F1) and capsules with acidulant (F2B and F06). Results Although there was interpatient variability with F1, entrectinib and M5 exposures increased dose dependently. Lower systemic exposures were observed in pediatric patients receiving 400 mg/m2 QD entrectinib (F1) versus adults receiving either the same dose/formulation or the recommended flat dose of 600 mg QD (~ 300 mg/m2 for a 70 kg adult) due to suboptimal F1 performance in the pediatric study. The observed pediatric exposures following 300 mg/m2 QD entrectinib (F06) were comparable to those in adults receiving 600 mg QD. Conclusions Overall, the F1 formulation of entrectinib was associated with lower systemic exposure in pediatric patients compared with the commercial acidulant formulation (F06). Systemic exposures achieved in pediatric patients with the F06 recommended dose (300 mg/m2) were within the known efficacious range in adults, confirming the adequacy of the recommended dose regimen with the commercial formulation.

Aegis operators simultaneously locate and monitor the activity of several hostile targets, intervening and alerting their team when appropriate. Utilizing the Aegis Combat System, operators find, track, and respond to dynamic targets on a radar screen. The demand that operators undergo is often high, inevitably causing strain on cognitive functions and detriments to performance. We applied model-based measures, Cost and Multitasking Throughput, to quantify the influence of external factors on processing efficiency in radar task(s). We captured the influence of three experimental manipulations, each of three levels, on human efficiency to track the location of hostiles and/or detect brief radar interference. We collected participants’ performance to complete a multiple object tracking (MOT) task and an electronic attack detection task (EA) using a radar display. A factorial manipulation of conditions comprised changes to task(s) (EA, MOT, or both), the number of targets to track (2, 4, or 6) and the presence or absence of distractors, deemed 'friendlies' (between 500-1000 total tracks). Our novel individual- and model-based approach provided quantitative estimates of human efficiency. We compared the observed variation in efficiency among predictors including target quantity, visual load, and the presence of one or two interrelated tasks. Through quantifying the relationship of these variables to radar detection tasks, we discuss implications of our findings and provide a framework to examine how system designers may develop tools to alleviate observed cognitive demands and/or counter potential threats of electronic attacks in radar detection and tracking tasks.

PURPOSE BRAF V600 mutations occur in many childhood cancers, including approximately 20% of low-grade gliomas (LGGs). Here, we describe a phase I/II study establishing pediatric dosing and pharmacokinetics of trametinib with or without dabrafenib, as well as efficacy and safety in a disease-specific cohort with BRAF V600–mutant LGG; other cohorts will be reported elsewhere. METHODS This is a four-part, phase I/II study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02124772 ) in patients age < 18 years with relapsed/refractory malignancies: trametinib monotherapy dose finding (part A) and disease-specific expansion (part B), and dabrafenib + trametinib dose finding (part C) and disease-specific expansion (part D). The primary objective assessed in all patients in parts A and C was to determine pediatric dosing on the basis of steady-state pharmacokinetics. Disease-specific efficacy and safety (across parts A-D) were secondary objectives. RESULTS Overall, 139 patients received trametinib (n = 91) or dabrafenib + trametinib (n = 48). Trametinib dose-limiting toxicities in > 1 patient (part A) included mucosal inflammation (n = 3) and hyponatremia (n = 2). There were no dose-limiting toxicities with combination therapy (part C). The recommended phase II dose of trametinib, with or without dabrafenib, was 0.032 mg/kg once daily for patients age < 6 years and 0.025 mg/kg once daily for patients age ≥ 6 years; dabrafenib dosing in the combination was as previously identified for monotherapy. In 49 patients with BRAF V600–mutant glioma (LGG, n = 47) across all four study parts, independently assessed objective response rates were 15% (95% CI, 1.9 to 45.4) for monotherapy (n = 13) and 25% (95% CI, 12.1 to 42.2) for combination (n = 36). Adverse event–related treatment discontinuations were more common with monotherapy (54% v 22%). CONCLUSION The trial design provided efficient evaluation of pediatric dosing, safety, and efficacy of single-agent and combination targeted therapy. Age-based and weight-based dosing of trametinib with or without dabrafenib achieved target concentrations with manageable safety and demonstrated clinical efficacy and tolerability in BRAF V600–mutant LGG.

Purpose: In many cancers, nivolumab in combination with ipilimumab improves response rates compared with either agent alone, but the combination has not been evaluated in childhood cancer. We conducted a phase I/II trial of nivolumab plus ipilimumab in children and young adults with recurrent/refractory solid tumors. Patients and Methods: ADVL1412, Part C assessed safety of nivolumab plus ipilimumab at two dose levels (DL): DL1 1 mg/kg of each drug and DL2 3 mg/kg nivolumab plus 1 mg/kg ipilimumab. Part D evaluated response at the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) in Ewing sarcoma, rhabdomyosarcoma, and osteosarcoma. Part E tested DL3 (1 mg/kg nivolumab plus 3 mg/kg ipilimumab) in Ewing sarcoma and rhabdomyosarcoma. Tumor response was measured using RECIST v1.1. Pharmacokinetics and PD-L1 expression on archival tissues were assessed. Results: Fifty-five eligible patients enrolled. Based on safety, tolerability, and similar drug exposure to the same doses administered in adults, DL2 was defined as the pediatric RP2D. Among 41 patients treated at the RP2D, 2 patients experienced dose-limiting toxicities during cycle 1, and 4 patients experienced toxicities beyond that period. Two patients had clinically significant sustained partial responses (1 rhabdomyosarcoma, 1 Ewing sarcoma) and 4 had stable disease. Among 8 patients treated at DL3, 3 dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) occurred, all immune-related adverse events; no objective responses were observed. Conclusions: The RP2D of nivolumab (3 mg/kg) plus ipilimumab (1 mg/kg) is well tolerated in children and young adults with solid tumors and shows some clinical activity. Increased dose of ipilimumab (3 mg/kg) plus nivolumab (1 mg/kg) was associated with increased toxicity without clinical benefit.

PURPOSE The National Cancer Institute–Children's Oncology Group Pediatric MATCH trial aimed to facilitate evaluation of molecular-targeted therapies in biomarker-selected cohorts of childhood and young adult patients with cancer by screening tumors for actionable alterations. PATIENTS AND METHODS Tumors from patients age 1-21 years with refractory solid tumors, lymphomas, or histiocytic disorders were subjected to cancer gene panel sequencing and limited immunohistochemistry to identify actionable alterations for assignment to phase II treatment arms. The rates of treatment arm assignment and enrollment were compared between clinical and demographic groups. RESULTS Testing was completed for 94.7% of tumors submitted. Actionable alterations were detected in 31.5% of the first 1,000 tumors screened, with treatment arm assignment and enrollment occurring in 28.4% and 13.1% of patients, respectively. Assignment rates varied by tumor histology and were higher for patients with CNS tumors or enrolled at Pediatric Early Phase Clinical Trials Network sites. A reported history of prior clinical molecular testing was associated with higher assignment and enrollment rates. Actionable alterations in the mitogen-activated protein kinase signaling pathway were most frequent (11.2%). The most common reasons provided for not enrolling on treatment arms were patients receiving other treatment or poor clinical status. CONCLUSION The Pediatric MATCH trial has proven the feasibility of a nationwide screening Protocol for identification of actionable genetic alterations and assignment of pediatric and young adult patients with refractory cancers to trials of molecularly targeted therapies. These data support the early use of tumor molecular screening for childhood patients with cancer whose tumors have not responded to standard treatments.

PURPOSE There is an increasing need to evaluate innovative drugs for childhood cancer using combination strategies. Strong biological rationale and clinical experience suggest that multiple agents will be more efficacious than monotherapy for most diseases and may overcome resistance mechanisms and increase synergy. The process to evaluate these combination trials needs to maximize efficiency and should be agreed by all stakeholders. METHODS After a review of existing combination trial methodologies, regulatory requirements, and current results, a consensus among stakeholders was achieved. RESULTS Combinations of anticancer therapies should be developed on the basis of mechanism of action and robust preclinical evaluation, and may include data from adult clinical trials. The general principle for combination early-phase studies is that, when possible, clinical trials should be dose- and schedule-confirmatory rather than dose-exploratory, and every effort should be made to optimize doses early. Efficient early-phase combination trials should be seamless, including dose confirmation and randomized expansion. Dose evaluation designs for combinations depend on the extent of previous knowledge. If not previously evaluated, limited evaluation of monotherapy should be included in the same clinical trial as the combination. Randomized evaluation of a new agent plus standard therapy versus standard therapy is the most effective approach to isolate the effect and toxicity of the novel agent. Platform trials may be valuable in the evaluation of combination studies. Patient advocates and regulators should be engaged with investigators early in a proposed clinical development pathway and trial design must consider regulatory requirements. CONCLUSION An optimized, agreed approach to the design and evaluation of early-phase pediatric combination trials will accelerate drug development and benefit all stakeholders, most importantly children and adolescents with cancer.

PURPOSE The NCI-COG Pediatric MATCH trial assigns patients age 1-21 years with relapsed or refractory solid tumors, lymphomas, and histiocytic disorders to phase II studies of molecularly targeted therapies on the basis of detection of predefined genetic alterations. Patients with tumors harboring mutations or fusions driving activation of the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway were treated with the MEK inhibitor selumetinib. METHODS Patients received selumetinib twice daily for 28-day cycles until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. The primary end point was objective response rate; secondary end points included progression-free survival and tolerability of selumetinib. RESULTS Twenty patients (median age: 14 years) were treated. All were evaluable for response and toxicities. The most frequent diagnoses were high-grade glioma (HGG; n = 7) and rhabdomyosarcoma (n = 7). Twenty-one actionable mutations were detected: hotspot mutations in KRAS (n = 8), NRAS (n = 3), and HRAS (n = 1), inactivating mutations in NF1 (n = 7), and BRAF V600E (n = 2). No objective responses were observed. Three patients had a best response of stable disease including two patients with HGG ( NF1 mutation, six cycles; KRAS mutation, 12 cycles). Six-month progression-free survival was 15% (95% CI, 4 to 34). Five patients (25%) experienced a grade 3 or higher adverse event that was possibly or probably attributable to study drug. CONCLUSION A national histology-agnostic molecular screening strategy was effective at identifying children and young adults eligible for treatment with selumetinib in the first Pediatric MATCH treatment arm to be completed. MEK inhibitors have demonstrated promising responses in some pediatric tumors (eg, low-grade glioma and plexiform neurofibroma). However, selumetinib in this cohort with treatment-refractory tumors harboring MAPK alterations demonstrated limited efficacy, indicating that pathway mutation status alone is insufficient to predict response to selumetinib monotherapy for pediatric cancers.

Background NCI-COG Pediatric MATCH assigns patients aged 1-21 years with refractory solid tumors, brain tumors, lymphomas, and histiocytic disorders to phase II trials of molecularly targeted therapies based on detection of pre-defined genetic alterations. Patients whose tumors harbored EZH2 mutations or loss of SMARCB1 or SMARCA4 by immunohistochemistry were treated with EZH2 inhibitor tazemetostat. Methods Patients received tazemetostat for 28-day cycles until disease progression or intolerable toxicity (max 26 cycles). The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR); secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and tolerability of tazemetostat. Results Twenty patients (median age, 5 years) enrolled, all evaluable for response and toxicities. The most frequent diagnoses were atypical teratoid rhabdoid tumor (ATRT; n = 8) and malignant rhabdoid tumor (MRT; n = 4). Actionable alterations consisted of SMARCB1 loss (n = 16), EZH2 mutation (n = 3), and SMARCA4 loss (n = 1). One objective response was observed in a patient with non-Langerhans cell histiocytosis with SMARCA4 loss (26 cycles, 1200 mg/m2/dose twice daily). Four patients with SMARCB1 loss had a best response of stable disease: epithelioid sarcoma (n = 2), ATRT (n = 1), renal medullary carcinoma (n = 1). Six-month PFS was 35% (95% CI: 15.7%, 55.2%) and six-month OS, 45% (95% CI 23.1, 64.7%). Treatment-related adverse events were consistent with prior tazemetostat reports. Conclusion Although tazemetostat did not meet its primary efficacy endpoint in this population of refractory pediatric tumors (ORR: 5%, 90% CI 1%, 20%), 25% of patients with multiple histologic diagnoses experienced prolonged stable disease of > 6 months (range: 9-26 cycles), suggesting a potential effect of tazemetostat on disease stabilization.

Purpose:In many cancers, nivolumab in combination with ipilimumab improves response rates compared with either agent alone, but the combination has not been evaluated in childhood cancer. We conducted a phase I/II trial of nivolumab plus ipilimumab in children and young adults with recurrent/refractory solid tumors.Patients and Methods:ADVL1412, Part C assessed safety of nivolumab plus ipilimumab at two dose levels (DL): DL1 1 mg/kg of each drug and DL2 3 mg/kg nivolumab plus 1 mg/kg ipilimumab. Part D evaluated response at the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) in Ewing sarcoma, rhabdomyosarcoma, and osteosarcoma. Part E tested DL3 (1 mg/kg nivolumab plus 3 mg/kg ipilimumab) in Ewing sarcoma and rhabdomyosarcoma. Tumor response was measured using RECIST v1.1. Pharmacokinetics and PD-L1 expression on archival tissues were assessed.Results:Fifty-five eligible patients enrolled. Based on safety, tolerability, and similar drug exposure to the same doses administered in adults, DL2 was defined as the pediatric RP2D. Among 41 patients treated at the RP2D, 2 patients experienced dose-limiting toxicities during cycle 1, and 4 patients experienced toxicities beyond that period. Two patients had clinically significant sustained partial responses (1 rhabdomyosarcoma, 1 Ewing sarcoma) and 4 had stable disease. Among 8 patients treated at DL3, 3 dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) occurred, all immune-related adverse events; no objective responses were observed.Conclusions:The RP2D of nivolumab (3 mg/kg) plus ipilimumab (1 mg/kg) is well tolerated in children and young adults with solid tumors and shows some clinical activity. Increased dose of ipilimumab (3 mg/kg) plus nivolumab (1 mg/kg) was associated with increased toxicity without clinical benefit.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Figure 1. Nivolumab (A) and Ipilumumab (B) peak and trough concentrations in treatment cycles 1 – 4.

Purpose:Aurora A kinase (AAK) plays an integral role in mitotic entry, DNA damage checkpoint recovery, and centrosome and spindle maturation. Alisertib (MLN8237) is a potent and selective AAK inhibitor. In pediatric preclinical models, antitumor activity was observed in neuroblastoma, acute lymphoblastic leukemia, and sarcoma xenografts. We conducted a phase 2 trial of alisertib in pediatric patients with refractory or recurrent solid tumors or acute leukemias (NCT01154816).Patients and Methods:Alisertib (80 mg/m2/dose) was administered orally, daily for 7 days every 21 days. Pharmacogenomic (PG) evaluation for polymorphisms in the AURK gene and drug metabolizing enzymes (UGT1A1*28), and plasma pharmacokinetic studies (PK) were performed. Using a 2-stage design, patients were enrolled to 12 disease strata (10 solid tumor and 2 acute leukemia). Response was assessed after cycle 1, then every other cycle.Results:A total of 139 children and adolescents (median age, 10 years) were enrolled, 137 were evaluable for response. Five objective responses were observed (2 complete responses and 3 partial responses). The most frequent toxicity was myelosuppression. The median alisertib trough concentration on day 4 was 1.3 μmol/L, exceeding the 1 μmol/L target trough concentration in 67% of patients. No correlations between PG or PK and toxicity were observed.Conclusions:Despite alisertib activity in pediatric xenograft models and cogent pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic relationships in preclinical models and adults, the objective response rate in children and adolescents receiving single-agent alisertib was less than 5%.

Legends for all included Supplementary Figures

Heat map of cell cycle gene expression. Gene expression was normalized and compared between the primary MTC, metastasis one, and metastasis two lesions from the whole transcriptome RNA-seq data. Purple indicates lower and yellow indicates higher expression. Values to generate colors are z-scores across each genes' relative transcript levels [log2(FPKM)].

Supplemental Table 1

Purpose:In phase I testing, alisertib tablets with irinotecan and temozolomide showed significant antitumor activity in patients with neuroblastoma. This study sought to confirm activity of this regimen; evaluate an alisertib oral solution; and evaluate biomarkers of clinical outcomes.Patients and Methods:We conducted a two-stage phase II trial of alisertib tablets (60 mg/m2/dose × 7 days), irinotecan (50 mg/m2/dose i.v. × 5 days), and temozolomide (100 mg/m2/dose orally × 5 days) in patients with relapsed or refractory neuroblastoma. The primary endpoint was best objective response. A separate cohort was treated with alisertib at 45 mg/m2 using oral solution instead of tablets. Exploratory analyses sought to identify predictors of toxicity, response, and progression-free survival (PFS) using pooled data from phase I, phase II, and oral solution cohorts.Results:Twenty and 12 eligible patients were treated in the phase II and oral solution cohorts, respectively. Hematologic toxicities were the most common adverse events. In phase II, partial responses were observed in 19 evaluable patients (21%). The estimated PFS at 1 year was 34%. In the oral solution cohort, 3 patients (25%) had first cycle dose-limiting toxicity (DLT). Alisertib oral solution at 45 mg/m2 had significantly higher median Cmax and exposure compared with tablets at 60 mg/m2. Higher alisertib trough concentration was associated with first cycle DLT, whereas MYCN amplification was associated with inferior PFS.Conclusions:This combination shows antitumor activity, particularly in patients with MYCN nonamplified tumors. Data on an alisertib oral solution expand the population able to be treated with this agent.

Weight-for-age and height-for-age growth curves. Male patient weights (A), heights (B) and female patient weights (C), and heights (D) were monitored during the follow up period. Patient weight-for-age and height-for-age values were compared to U.S. Center for Disease Control reference growth curves.

Supplemental Figure 2

Doubling time of calcitonin and CEA for patient #12 was suggestive of progressive disease. Patient #12 experienced best response 434 days after starting vandetanib, with stable lesions in the thyroid bed (showed on T2-weighted MRI of the neck, A) and the mediastinum (showed on CT of the chest, B). In August 2016, the sum of longest diameter (per RECIST) of target lesions was consistent with SD (C,D) (note that not all target lesions are shown). Biomarker response in the two years prior (E) showed CEA doubling time 1.2 years (F) and calcitonin doubling time 1.67 years (G). Patient #12 was confirmed to have PD via RECIST February 2017.

Supplemental Figure 1

Purpose:Adavosertib (AZD1775), an inhibitor of WEE1 kinase, potentiates replicative stress induced by oncogenes or chemotherapy. Antitumor activity of adavosertib has been demonstrated in preclinical models of pediatric cancer. This phase I trial was performed to define dose-limiting toxicities (DLT), recommended phase II dose (RP2D), and pharmacokinetics of adavosertib in combination with irinotecan in children and adolescents with relapsed or refractory solid tumors or primary central nervous system tumors.Patients and Methods:Using a 3+3 escalation design, five dose cohorts of the combination of adavosertib and irinotecan (50/70; 65/70; 65/90; 85/90; 110/90 mg/m2/day) delivered on days 1–5 of a 21-day cycle were studied. Pharmacokinetics and analysis of peripheral blood γH2AX was performed.Results:Thirty-seven patients were enrolled; 27 were evaluable. The median (range) age was 14 (2–20) years. Twenty-five (93%) received prior chemotherapy (median, three regimens) and 21 (78%) received prior radiotherapy. Eleven patients had a primary central nervous system (CNS) malignancy. Common toxicities were hematologic and gastrointestinal. Two patients receiving adavosertib (110 mg/m2) in combination with irinotecan (90 mg/m2) experienced dose-limiting grade 3 dehydration. A patient with Ewing sarcoma had a confirmed partial response and 2 patients (ependymoma and neuroblastoma) had prolonged stable disease (≥ 6 cycles). Pharmacokinetics of adavosertib were variable but generally dose proportional and clearance was lower in younger patients.Conclusions:Adavosertib (85 mg/m2) in combination with irinotecan (90 mg/m2) administered orally for 5 days was the MTD in children and adolescents with solid and CNS tumors.

Purpose:Anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) aberrations are a promising target for patients with neuroblastoma. We assessed the activity of first-generation ALK inhibitor crizotinib in patients with no known curative treatments and whose tumors harbored an activating ALK alteration.Patients and Methods:Twenty patients with relapsed/refractory ALK-positive neuroblastoma received crizotinib at the recommended phase II dose of 280 mg/m2/dose. A Simon two-stage design was used to evaluate the antitumor activity of crizotinib monotherapy. Response evaluation occurred after cycles 1, 3, 5, 7, and then every 3 cycles. Correlation of ALK status and response was a secondary aim of the study.Results:The objective response rate for patients with neuroblastoma was 15% [95% confidence interval (CI): 3.3%–34.3%]: two with partial responses and 1 with a complete response. All three patients had a somatic ALK Arg1275Gln mutation, the most common ALK hotspot mutation observed in neuroblastoma and the only mutation predicted to be sensitive to ALK inhibition with crizotinib. Two patients had prolonged stable disease (10 and 13 cycles, respectively); both harbored an ALK Arg1275Gln mutation. Three patients with ALK Phe1174Leu mutations progressed during cycle 1 of therapy, and one patient with an ALK Phe1174Val received three cycles before disease progression. The two patients with ALK amplification had no response. The most common adverse event was a decrease in neutrophil count.Conclusions:Despite limited activity seen in this trial, we conclude that this is more likely due to an inability to reach the higher concentrations of crizotinib needed to overcome the competing ATP affinity.See related commentary by Schulte and Eggert, p. 3507