Search

Tepotinib is approved for the treatment of patients with non-small-cell lung cancer harboring MET exon 14 skipping alterations. While edema is the most prevalent adverse event (AE) and a known class effect of MET inhibitors including tepotinib, there is still limited understanding about the factors contributing to its occurrence. Herein, we apply machine learning (ML)-based approaches to predict the likelihood of occurrence of edema in patients undergoing tepotinib treatment, and to identify factors influencing its development over time. Data from 612 patients receiving tepotinib in five Phase I/II studies were modeled with two ML algorithms, Random Forest, and Gradient Boosting Trees, to predict edema AE incidence and severity. Probability calibration was applied to give a realistic estimation of the likelihood of edema AE. Best model was tested on follow-up data and on data from clinical studies unused while training. Results showed high performances across all the tested settings, with F1 scores up to 0.961 when retraining the model with the most relevant covariates. The use of ML explainability methods identified serum albumin as the most informative longitudinal covariate, and higher age as associated with higher probabilities of more severe edema. The developed methodological framework enables the use of ML algorithms for analyzing clinical safety data and exploiting longitudinal information through various covariate engineering approaches. Probability calibration ensures the accurate estimation of the likelihood of the AE occurrence, while explainability tools can identify factors contributing to model predictions, hence supporting population and individual patient-level interpretation., (© 2024 The Author(s). Clinical and Translational Science published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.)

Background: Patients with EGFR-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and MET amplification as a mechanism of resistance to first-line osimertinib have few treatment options. Here, we report the primary analysis of the phase 2 INSIGHT 2 study evaluating tepotinib, a highly selective MET inhibitor, combined with osimertinib in this population., Methods: This open-label, phase 2 study was conducted at 179 academic centres and community clinics in 17 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 and advanced or metastatic EGFR-mutated NSCLC of any histology, with MET amplification by tissue biopsy fluorescence in-situ hybridisation (FISH; MET gene copy number of ≥5 or MET-to-CEP7 ratio of ≥2) or liquid biopsy next-generation sequencing (MET plasma gene copy number of ≥2·3), following progression on first-line osimertinib. Patients received oral tepotinib 500 mg plus oral osimertinib 80 mg once daily. The primary endpoint was independently assessed objective response in patients with MET amplification by central FISH treated with tepotinib plus osimertinib with at least 9 months of follow-up. Safety was analysed in patients who received at least one study drug dose. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03940703 (enrolment complete)., Findings: Between Feb 13, 2020, and Nov 4, 2022, 128 patients (74 [58%] female, 54 [42%] male) were enrolled and initiated tepotinib plus osimertinib. The primary activity analysis population included 98 patients with MET amplification confirmed by central FISH, previous first-line osimertinib and at least 9 months of follow-up (median 12·7 months [IQR 9·9-20·3]). The confirmed objective response rate was 50·0% (95% CI 39·7-60·3; 49 of 98 patients). The most common treatment-related grade 3 or worse adverse events were peripheral oedema (six [5%] of 128 patients), decreased appetite (five [4%]), prolonged electrocardiogram QT interval (five [4%]), and pneumonitis (four [3%]). Serious treatment-related adverse events were reported in 16 (13%) patients. Deaths of four (3%) patients were assessed as potentially related to either trial drug by the investigator due to pneumonitis (two [2%] patients), decreased platelet count (one [1%]), respiratory failure (one [1%]), and dyspnoea (one [1%]); one death was attributed to both pneumonitis and dyspnoea., Interpretation: Tepotinib plus osimertinib showed promising activity and acceptable safety in patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC and MET amplification as a mechanism of resistance to first-line osimertinib, suggesting a potential chemotherapy-sparing oral targeted therapy option that should be further investigated., Funding: Merck (CrossRef Funder ID: 10.13039/100009945)., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests Y-LW reports receiving institute grants from AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Pfizer; consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck, and Roche; and speaker fees from AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Hengrui, Pfizer, Roche, and Sanofi. VG reports receiving personal fees for advisory board membership from AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Exact Sciences, Gilead, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and Olema Oncology; speaker fees from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Exact Sciences, Gilead, GSK, and Novartis; fees for expert testimony for Eli Lilly; and travel support from Gilead, AstraZeneca, and PharmaMar. PJV reports receiving personal fees for advisory board membership from Amgen, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Ipsen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and Roche. MWi reports receiving personal advisory board fees, consulting fees, speaker fees, and institute grants from AstraZeneca. CKL reports receiving research grants from AstraZeneca and Boehringer Ingelheim; honoraria for lectures from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and Zuellig Pharma; travel support from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and Roche; and personal fees for advisory board membership from AstraZeneca, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and Roche. JM reports receiving advisory board fees from Roche, Bristol Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Novartis, Merck, Daiichi Sankyo, and MSD, and research funding to his institution from Roche, AstraZeneca, and Pierre Fabre. LMT reports receiving advisory board fees from AstraZeneca, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and Roche; personal honoraria fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and Roche; and travel support from AstraZeneca, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and Roche. HH reports receiving honoraria fees from AstraZeneca, Ono Pharmaceutical, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Boehringer Ingelheim, Sysmex Corporation, 3H Medi Solution, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Pfizer, Novartis, Merck Biopharma Co, Tokyo, Japan, an affiliate of Merck, Amgen, Daiichi Sankyo/UCB Japan, Takeda, and MSD; research funding from IQVIA, Syneos Health Clinical, EPS Corporation, Nippon Kayaku, Takeda, MSD, Amgen, Taiho Pharmaceutical, Bristol Myers Squibb, Janssen, CMIC, Pfizer R&D, LabCorp, Kobayashi Pharmaceutical, Pfizer, Eisai, EP-CRSU, Shionogi & Co, Otsuka Pharmaceutical, GSK, Sanofi, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Boehringer Ingelheim, SRL Medisearch, PRA Health Sciences, Astellas Pharma, Ascent Development Services, and Bayer; and financial support for the present manuscript from Guardant Health. PLC reports receiving advisory board fees from AstraZeneca, Merck, and Pfizer, and honoraria fees from AstraZeneca. JR reports receiving personal honoraria from Bristol Myers Squibb, speaker fees (to their institution) from Merck, and advisory board fees (to their institution) from Merck. GF reports receiving personal fees for speaker engagements with AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, and MSD, and travel support from Roche. TK reports receiving honoraria from Amgen, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Merck, MSD, Novartis, Ono Pharmaceutical, Pfizer, Taiho, and Takeda; receiving research funding for their institution from AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, BluePrint, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Haihe Biopharma, Merck, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Takeda, and TurningPoint; receiving advisory board fees from AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Daiichi Sankyo, Janssen, Merck, MSD, Novartis, and Pfizer; and their spouse as an employee of Eli Lilly. EN reports receiving research funding from Roche, Pfizer, EMD Serono Research & Development Institute, Billerica, MA, USA, an affiliate of Merck, and Bristol Myers Squibb; consulting fees from Roche, Bristol Myers Squibb, MSD, EMD Serono Research & Development Institute, Billerica, MA, USA, an affiliate of Merck, Sanofi, Pfizer, Eli Lilly, Amgen, Janssen, Daiichi Sankyo, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Takeda, Sanofi, Janssen, Pierre Fabre, Qiagen, and Bayer; personal honoraria for lectures from Roche, Bristol Myers Squibb, MSD, Sanofi, Pfizer, Eli Lilly, Amgen, Janssen, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Takeda, Sanofi, Janssen, Qiagen, Mirati, and Bayer; travel support from Takeda, MSD, AstraZeneca, and Roche; and fees for participation in data safety meetings from Apollomics. HSH reports receiving research grants for their institution from AstraZeneca, Merck, Janssen, Novartis, and Boehringer Ingelheim; honoraria and fees for lectures and advisory board meetings from AstraZeneca, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and Janssen; and travel support from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and Roche. EFS reports receiving advisory or consultancy fees to their institution from Eli Lilly, AstraZeneca, MSD, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Takeda, and Daiichi Sankyo; personal speaker fees from Boehringer Ingelheim; and advisory board fees from Merck and Daiichi Sankyo. MWe reports holding a consulting or advisory role for Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis, Eli Lilly, Boehringer Ingelheim, ISA Pharmaceuticals, Amgen, Immatics, Bayer, and ImCheck therapeutics; honoraria fees from Eli Lilly, Boehringer Ingelheim, SYNLAB, Janssen, EMD Serono Research & Development Institute, Billerica, MA, USA, an affiliate of Merck, GWT, Amgen, and Novartis; travel support from Pfizer, Bristol Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, Amgen, GEMoaB, Sanofi/Aventis, Immatics, and EMD Serono Research & Development Institute, Billerica, MA, USA, an affiliate of Merck; and research funding to his institution from Roche. DT reports receiving consulting fees for their institution from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, DKSH, GSK, Merck, Novartis, Roche, Pfizer, and Takeda; research funding from ACM Biolabs, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, and Pfizer; and speaker fees for their institution from Amgen, Bayer, Merck, Pfizer, Novartis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche, and Takeda. MM reports receiving research funding from Boehringer Ingelheim and Eli Lilly; personal honoraria fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Eli Lilly, Chugai Pharmaceutical, MSD, Ono Pharmaceutical, and Taiho Pharmaceutical; and other clinical trial support from Chugai Pharmaceutical, AstraZeneca, Ono Pharmaceutical, Pfizer, EMD Serono Research & Development Institute, Billerica, MA, USA, an affiliate of Merck, Kissei, Taiho, and Novartis. AO’B, SA, BMP, CS, DJ, RS, BE-L, and NK report being employees of Merck. KB reports being an employee of Merck at the time of the study and manuscript preparation. KG reports being an employee of EMD Serono Research & Development Institute, Billerica, MA, USA, an affiliate of Merck. XL reports receiving consulting fees from EMD Serono Research & Development Institute, Billerica, MA, USA, an affiliate of Merck, AstraZeneca, Spectrum Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, Eli Lilly, Boehringer Ingelheim, Hengrui Therapeutics, Janssen Oncology, Daiichi Sankyo, Blueprint Medicines, Sensei Biotherapeutics, AbbVie, Arrivent, and Regeneron; travel support from Spectrum Pharmaceuticals and EMD Serono Research & Development Institute, Billerica, MA, USA, an affiliate of Merck, and research funding to their institution from Eli Lilly, Boehringer Ingelheim, EMD Serono Research & Development Institute, Billerica, MA, USA, an affiliate of Merck, and Regeneron. TMK reports receiving grants for their institution from AstraZeneca; consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Janssen, Regeneron, Samsung Bioepis, Takeda, and Yuhan; honoraria for lectures from AstraZeneca, IMBDx, Janssen, Takeda, and Yuhan; advisory board fees from AstraZeneca, Janssen, Regeneron, and Takeda; and clinical trial funding to their institution from AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca/Medimmune, Bayer, Black Diamond Therapeutics, Blueprint Medicines, Boryung, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Dizal, EMD Serono Research & Development Institute, Billerica, MA, USA, an affiliate of Merck, Roche/Genentech, Hanmi, Genmab, Janssen, Novartis, RAPT Therapeutics, Regeneron, Sanofi, Takeda, and Yuhan. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies.)

Background: Tepotinib, a MET inhibitor approved for the treatment of MET exon 14 (METex14) skipping NSCLC, demonstrated durable clinical activity in VISION (Cohort A + C; N = 313): objective response rate (ORR) 51.4% (95% CI: 45.8, 57.1); median duration of response (mDOR) 18.0 months (95% CI: 12.4, 46.4). We report outcomes in Asian patients from VISION (Cohort A + C) (cut-off: November 20, 2022)., Methods: Patients with advanced METex14 skipping NSCLC, detected by liquid or tissue biopsy, received tepotinib 500 mg (450 mg active moiety) once daily., Primary Endpoint: objective response (RECIST 1.1) by independent review. Secondary endpoints included: DOR, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), safety, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL)., Results: Across treatment lines in 106 Asian patients (39.6% female, 43.4% smoking history, 79.2% adenocarcinoma, 47.2% treatment-naive), ORR was 56.6% (95% CI: 46.6, 66.2), mDOR 18.5 months (10.4, ne), mPFS 13.8 months (10.8, 22.0), and mOS 25.5 months (19.3, 36.4). Consistent efficacy observed, regardless of baseline characteristics. HRQoL remained stable during treatment. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 95.3% of patients (39.6% Grade ≥3). Most common TRAEs: peripheral edema (62.3%), creatinine increase (38.7%)., Conclusions: Tepotinib demonstrated robust and durable efficacy, with a manageable safety profile, in Asian patients with METex14 skipping NSCLC., Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02864992., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Importance: MET inhibitors have recently demonstrated clinical activity in patients with MET exon 14 (METex14)-skipping non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC); however, data with longer follow-up and in larger populations are needed to further optimize therapeutic approaches., Objective: To assess the long-term efficacy and safety of tepotinib, a potent and highly selective MET inhibitor, in patients with METex14-skipping NSCLC in the VISION study., Design, Setting, and Participants: The VISION phase 2 nonrandomized clinical trial was a multicohort, open-label, multicenter study that enrolled patients with METex14-skipping advanced/metastatic NSCLC (cohorts A and C) from September 2016 to May 2021. Cohort C (>18 months' follow-up) was an independent cohort, designed to confirm findings from cohort A (>35 months' follow-up). Data cutoff was November 20, 2022., Intervention: Patients received tepotinib, 500 mg (450 mg active moiety), once daily., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was objective response by independent review committee (RECIST v1.1). Secondary end points included duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety., Results: Cohorts A and C included 313 patients (50.8% female, 33.9% Asian; median [range] age, 72 [41-94] years). The objective response rate (ORR) was 51.4% (95% CI, 45.8%-57.1%) with a median (m)DOR of 18.0 (95% CI, 12.4-46.4) months. In cohort C (n = 161), an ORR of 55.9% (95% CI, 47.9%-63.7%) with an mDOR of 20.8 (95% CI, 12.6-not estimable [NE]) months was reported across treatment lines, comparable to cohort A (n = 152). In treatment-naive patients (cohorts A and C; n = 164), ORR was 57.3% (95% CI, 49.4%-65.0%) and mDOR was 46.4 (95% CI, 13.8-NE) months. In previously treated patients (n = 149), ORR was 45.0% (95% CI, 36.8%-53.3%) and mDOR was 12.6 (95% CI, 9.5-18.5) months. Peripheral edema, the most common treatment-related adverse event, occurred in 210 patients (67.1%) (35 [11.2%] experienced grade ≥3 events)., Conclusions and Relevance: The findings from cohort C in this nonrandomized clinical trial supported the results from original cohort A. Overall, the long-term outcomes of VISION demonstrated robust and durable clinical activity following treatment with tepotinib, particularly in the treatment-naive setting, in the largest known clinical trial of patients with METex14-skipping NSCLC, supporting the global approvals of tepotinib and enabling clinicians to implement this therapeutic approach for such patients., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02864992.

Purpose: The final analyses of the INSIGHT phase II study evaluating tepotinib (a selective MET inhibitor) plus gefitinib versus chemotherapy in patients with MET-altered EGFR-mutant NSCLC (data cut-off: September 3, 2021)., Patients and Methods: Adults with advanced/metastatic EGFR-mutant NSCLC, acquired resistance to first-/second-generation EGFR inhibitors, and MET gene copy number (GCN) ≥5, MET:CEP7 ≥2, or MET IHC 2+/3+ were randomized to tepotinib 500 mg (450 mg active moiety) plus gefitinib 250 mg once daily, or chemotherapy. Primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). MET-amplified subgroup analysis was preplanned., Results: Overall (N = 55), median PFS was 4.9 months versus 4.4 months [stratified HR, 0.67; 90% CI, 0.35-1.28] with tepotinib plus gefitinib versus chemotherapy. In 19 patients with MET amplification (median age 60.4 years; 68.4% never-smokers; median GCN 8.8; median MET/CEP7 2.8; 89.5% with MET IHC 3+), tepotinib plus gefitinib improved PFS (HR, 0.13; 90% CI, 0.04-0.43) and overall survival (OS; HR, 0.10; 90% CI, 0.02-0.36) versus chemotherapy. Objective response rate was 66.7% with tepotinib plus gefitinib versus 42.9% with chemotherapy; median duration of response was 19.9 months versus 2.8 months. Median duration of tepotinib plus gefitinib was 11.3 months (range, 1.1-56.5), with treatment >1 year in six (50.0%) and >4 years in three patients (25.0%). Seven patients (58.3%) had treatment-related grade ≥3 adverse events with tepotinib plus gefitinib and five (71.4%) had chemotherapy., Conclusions: Final analysis of INSIGHT suggests improved PFS and OS with tepotinib plus gefitinib versus chemotherapy in a subgroup of patients with MET-amplified EGFR-mutant NSCLC, after progression on EGFR inhibitors., (©2023 The Authors; Published by the American Association for Cancer Research.)

Background: Tepotinib, a highly selective, oral, once-daily MET inhibitor, has been approved for treatment of metastatic MET exon 14 skipping non-small cell lung cancer., Objectives: This article provides nurse-specific recommendations for identification and management of tepotinib adverse events (AEs)., Methods: Guidance on monitoring and proactive/reactive AE management was developed based on published literature and real-world nursing experience. Case studies of VISION trial participants were summarized to illustrate key principles., Findings: Tepotinib AEs are generally mild to moderate and manageable, and can include peripheral edema, hypoalbuminemia, nausea, diarrhea, and creatinine increase. Alongside supportive care, tepotinib interruption and dose reduction is recommended for grade 3 AEs. For peripheral edema, proactive monitoring is crucial, and treatment interruption (including frequent, short treatment holidays) should be considered early. Nursing management of tepotinib AEs includes proactive monitoring, patient education, and interprofessional team coordination.

Purpose: Tepotinib is a highly selective MET inhibitor approved for treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring METex14 skipping alterations. Analyses presented herein evaluated the relationship between tepotinib exposure, and efficacy and safety outcomes., Methods: Exposure-efficacy analyses included data from an ongoing phase 2 study (VISION) investigating 500 mg/day tepotinib in NSCLC harboring METex14 skipping alterations. Efficacy endpoints included objective response, duration of response, and progression-free survival. Exposure-safety analyses included data from VISION, plus four completed studies in advanced solid tumors/hepatocellular carcinoma (30-1400 mg). Safety endpoints included edema, serum albumin, creatinine, amylase, lipase, alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase, and QT interval corrected using Fridericia's method (QTcF)., Results: Tepotinib exhibited flat exposure-efficacy relationships for all endpoints within the exposure range observed with 500 mg/day. Tepotinib also exhibited flat exposure-safety relationships for all endpoints within the exposure range observed with 30-1400 mg doses. Edema is the most frequently reported adverse event and the most frequent cause of tepotinib dose reductions and interruptions; however, the effect plateaued at low exposures. Concentration-QTc analyses using data from 30 to 1400 mg tepotinib resulted in the upper bounds of the 90% confidence interval being less than 10 ms for the mean exposures at the therapeutic (500 mg) and supratherapeutic (1000 mg) doses., Conclusions: These analyses provide important quantitative pharmacologic support for benefit/risk assessment of the 500 mg/day dosage of tepotinib as being appropriate for the treatment of NSCLC harboring METex14 skipping alterations., Registration Numbers: NCT01014936, NCT01832506, NCT01988493, NCT02115373, NCT02864992., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Introduction: The MET inhibitor tepotinib demonstrated durable clinical activity in patients with advanced MET exon 14 (METex14) skipping NSCLC. We report detailed analyses of adverse events of clinical interest (AECIs) in VISION, including edema, a class effect of MET inhibitors., Patients and Methods: Incidence, management, and time to first onset/resolution were analyzed for all-cause AECIs, according to composite categories (edema, hypoalbuminemia, creatinine increase, and ALT/AST increase) or individual preferred terms (pleural effusion, nausea, diarrhea, and vomiting), for patients with METex14 skipping NSCLC in the phase II VISION trial., Results: Of 255 patients analyzed (median age: 72 years), edema, the most common AECI, was reported in 69.8% (grade 3, 9.4%; grade 4, 0%). Median time to first edema onset was 7.9 weeks (range: 0.1-58.3). Edema was manageable with supportive measures, dose reduction (18.8%), and/or treatment interruption (23.1%), and rarely prompted discontinuation (4.3%). Other AECIs were also manageable and predominantly mild/moderate: hypoalbuminemia, 23.9% (grade 3, 5.5%); pleural effusion, 13.3% (grade ≥ 3, 5.1%); creatinine increase, 25.9% (grade 3, 0.4%); nausea, 26.7% (grade 3, 0.8%), diarrhea, 26.3% (grade 3, 0.4%), vomiting 12.9% (grade 3, 1.2%), and ALT/AST increase, 12.2% (grade ≥ 3, 3.1%). GI AEs typically occurred early and resolved in the first weeks., Conclusion: Tepotinib was well tolerated in the largest trial of a MET inhibitor in METex14 skipping NSCLC. The most frequent AEs were largely mild/moderate and manageable with supportive measures and/or dose reduction/interruption, and caused few withdrawals in this elderly population., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

MET exon 14 (METex14) skipping mutations occur in 3% to 4% of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) cases. Currently, four oral MET tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are in use for the treatment of patients with METex14 skipping NSCLC (tepotinib, capmatinib, savolitinib, and crizotinib). To support optimal management of METex14 skipping NSCLC in this typically older patient population, the safety profiles of these treatment options are reviewed here. Published safety data from prospective clinical trials with MET TKIs in patients with METex14 skipping NSCLC were reviewed. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurring in ≥ 10% of patients were reported where feasible. Guidance on clinical monitoring and management of key MET TKI TRAEs and drug-drug interactions is provided. Across the clinical trials, safety data for MET TKIs were reported for 442 patients with METex14 skipping. Peripheral edema was the most reported TRAE (50%-63% of patients; grade ≥ 3: 1%-11%), followed by nausea (26%-46% of patients; grade ≥ 3: 0%-1%). TRAEs led to dose reductions in 33% to 38% of patients and to discontinuation in 7% to 14% of patients, across the MET TKIs. Considerations on interpreting available safety data are provided, along with insights into monitoring and managing specific MET TKI TRAEs of interest and drug-drug interactions. Overall, MET TKIs are tolerable treatment options for patients with METex14 skipping NSCLC, an older population for whom chemo- or immuno-therapy may not be an effective nor tolerable option. More data regarding the effectiveness of safety interventions and management strategies are needed., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Primary analysis of VISION showed tepotinib had durable clinical activity in patients with MET exon 14 (METex14) skipping non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We present updated outcomes for clinically relevant subgroups., Patients and Methods: This phase II, open-label, multi-cohort study of 500 mg (450 mg active moiety) tepotinib in patients with METex14 skipping NSCLC assessed efficacy and safety in predefined subgroups according to age, prior therapies (chemotherapy and immune checkpoint inhibitors), and brain metastases. An ad hoc retrospective analysis using Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology Brain Metastases (RANO-BM) criteria assessed intracranial activity., Results: 152 patients were evaluable for efficacy (median age: 73.1). Overall, objective response rate (ORR) was 44.7% [95% confidence interval (CI): 36.7-53.0]. Patients aged <75 (n = 84) and ≥75 (n = 68) had ORRs of 48.8% (95% CI: 37.7-60.0) and 39.7% (95% CI: 28.0-52.3), respectively. Treatment-naïve (n = 69) versus previously treated (n = 83) patients showed consistent efficacy [ORR (95% CI): 44.9% (32.9-57.4) vs. 44.6% (33.7-55.9); median duration of response (95% CI): 10.8 (6.9-not estimable) vs. 11.1 (9.5-18.5) months]. Of 15 patients analyzed by RANO-BM (12 received prior radiotherapy), 13 achieved intracranial disease control; 5 of 7 patients with measurable brain metastases had partial intracranial responses. Of 255 patients evaluable for safety, 64 (25.1%) experienced grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events (TRAE), leading to discontinuation in 27 patients (10.6%). Rates of adverse events (AE) were broadly consistent irrespective of prior therapies., Conclusions: Tepotinib showed meaningful activity across subgroups by age, prior therapies, and brain metastases, with a manageable safety profile and few treatment discontinuations. See related commentary by Rosner and Spira, p. 1055., (©2021 The Authors; Published by the American Association for Cancer Research.)

Phagocytosis is an important part of innate immunity and describes the engulfment of bacteria and other extracellular objects on the micrometer scale. The protrusion of the cell membrane around the bacteria during this process is driven by a reorganization of the actin cortex. The process has been studied on the molecular level to great extent during the past decades. However, a deep, fundamental understanding of the mechanics of the process is still lacking, in particular because of a lack of techniques that give access to binding dynamics below the optical resolution limit and cellular viscoelasticity at the same time. In this work, we propose a technique to characterize the mechanical properties of cells in a highly localized manner and apply it to investigate the early stages of phagocytosis. The technique can simultaneously resolve the contact region between a cell and an external object (in our application, a phagocytic target) even below the optical resolution limit. We used immunoglobulin-G-coated microparticles with a size of 2 μm as a model system and attached the particles to the macrophages with holographic optical tweezers. By switching the trap on and off, we were able to measure the rheological properties of the cells in a time-resolved manner during the first few minutes after attachment. The measured viscoelastic cellular response is consistent with power law rheology. The contact radius between particle and cell increased on a timescale of ∼30 s and converged after a few minutes. Although the binding dynamics are not affected by cytochalasin D, we observed an increase of the cellular compliance and a significant fluidization of the cortex after addition of cytochalasin D treatment. Furthermore, we report upper boundaries for the length- and timescale, at which cortical actin has been hypothesized to depolymerize during early phagocytosis., (Copyright © 2021 Biophysical Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: This open-label, Phase 1b/2 study evaluated the highly selective MET inhibitor tepotinib in systemic anticancer treatment (SACT)-naive Asian patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC) with MET overexpression., Methods: In Phase 2b, tepotinib was orally administered once daily (300, 500 or 1,000 mg) to Asian adults with aHCC. The primary endpoints were dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) and adverse events (AEs). Phase 2 randomised SACT-naive Asian adults with aHCC with MET overexpression to tepotinib (recommended Phase 2 dose [RP2D]) or sorafenib 400 mg twice daily. The primary endpoint was independently assessed time to progression (TTP)., Results: In Phase 1b (n = 27), no DLTs occurred; the RP2D was 500 mg. In Phase 2 (n = 90, 45 patients per arm), the primary endpoint was met: independently assessed TTP was significantly longer with tepotinib versus sorafenib (median 2.9 versus 1.4 months, HR = 0.42, 90% confidence interval: 0.26-0.70, P = 0.0043). Progression-free survival and objective response also favoured tepotinib. Treatment-related Grade ≥3 AE rates were 28.9% with tepotinib and 45.5% with sorafenib., Conclusions: Tepotinib improved TTP versus sorafenib and was generally well tolerated in SACT-naive Asian patients with aHCC with MET overexpression., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01988493., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Background: This Phase 1b/2 study evaluated tepotinib, a highly selective MET inhibitor, in US/European patients with sorafenib pretreated advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC) with MET overexpression., Methods: Eligible adults had aHCC, progression after ≥4 weeks of sorafenib, and, for Phase 2 only, MET overexpression. Tepotinib was administered once daily at 300 or 500 mg in Phase 1b ('3 + 3' design), and at the recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D) in Phase 2. Primary endpoints were dose-liming toxicities (DLTs; Phase 1b) and 12-week investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS; Phase 2)., Results: In Phase 1b (n = 17), no DLTs occurred and the RP2D was confirmed as 500 mg. In Phase 2 (n = 49), the primary endpoint was met: 12-week PFS was 63.3% (90% CI: 50.5-74.7), which was significantly greater than the predefined null hypothesis of ≤15% (one-sided binomial exact test: P < 0.0001). Median time to progression was 4 months. In Phase 2, 28.6% of patients had treatment-related Grade ≥3 adverse events, including peripheral oedema and lipase increase (both 6.1%)., Conclusions: Tepotinib was generally well tolerated and the RP2D (500 mg) showed promising efficacy and, therefore, a positive benefit-risk balance in sorafenib pretreated aHCC with MET overexpression., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02115373., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Background: This open-label, phase 1 trial (NCT02316197) aimed to determine the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) and/or recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of peposertib (formerly M3814), a DNA-dependent protein kinase (DNA-PK) inhibitor in patients with advanced solid tumours. Secondary/exploratory objectives included safety/tolerability, pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profiles and clinical activity., Methods: Adult patients with advanced solid tumours received peposertib 100-200 mg once daily or 150-400 mg twice daily (BID) in 21-day cycles., Results: Thirty-one patients were included (median age 66 years, 61% male). One dose-limiting toxicity, consisting of mainly gastrointestinal, non-serious adverse events (AEs) and long recovery duration, was reported at 300 mg BID. The most common peposertib-related AEs were nausea, vomiting, fatigue and pyrexia. The most common peposertib-related Grade 3 AEs were maculopapular rash and nausea. Peposertib was quickly absorbed systemically (median T max 1.1-2.5 h). The p-DNA-PK/t-DNA-PK ratio decreased consistently in peripheral blood mononuclear cells 3-6 h after doses ≥100 mg. The best overall response was stable disease (12 patients), lasting for ≥12 weeks in seven patients., Conclusions: Peposertib was well-tolerated and demonstrated modest efficacy in unselected tumours. The MTD was not reached; the RP2D was declared as 400 mg BID. Further studies, mainly with peposertib/chemo-radiation, are ongoing., Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02316197.

Macrophages internalize pathogens for intracellular degradation. An important part of this process is the phagosomal transport from the cell periphery to the perinuclear region. Biochemical factors are known to influence the fate of phagosomes. Here, we show that the size of phagosomes also has a strong influence on their transport. We found that large phagosomes are transported persistently to the nucleus, whereas small phagosomes show strong bidirectional transport. We show that dynein motors play a larger role in the transport of large phagosomes, whereas actin filament-based motility plays a larger role in the transport of small phagosomes. Furthermore, we investigated the spatial distribution of dyneins and microtubules around phagosomes and hypothesize that dynein and microtubule density differences between the nucleus-facing side of phagosomes and the opposite side could explain part of the observed transport characteristics. Our findings suggest that a size-dependent cellular sorting mechanism might exist that supports macrophages in their immunological roles.

Counter-propagating optical traps are widely used where long working distances, axially symmetric trapping potentials, or standing light waves are required. We demonstrate that optical phase-conjugation can automatically provide a counter-propagating replica of a wide range of incident light fields in an optical trapping configuration. The resulting counter-propagating traps are self-adjusting and adapt dynamically to changes of the input light field. It is shown that not only single counter-propagating traps can be implemented by phase-conjugation, but also structured light fields can be used. This step towards more complex traps enables advanced state-of-the-art applications where multiple traps or other elaborated trapping scenarios are required. The resulting traps cannot only be used statically, but they can be rearranged in real-time and allow for interactive dynamic manipulation.

Background: Metastatic disease isolated to the liver is present at the time of diagnosis in 20-30% of patients with colorectal cancer. Only 10% of patients are eligible for resection. Systemic chemotherapy remains the primary treatment modality for such patients. The morbidity associated with regional chemotherapy is largely a result of the laparotomy required to place a hepatic arterial infusion pump in these debilitated patients. We discuss the main advantages of laparoscopic approach in comparison to both open procedure and percutaneous hepatic artery catheterization., Material and Methods: From November 1993 to April 2004, 27 patients (16 males, 11 females) underwent laparoscopic placement of a hepatic artery catheter. The mean age was 64.9 years (46 to 82 years). 24 patients (88.8%) had bilobar disease precluding surgical resection of the liver metastases. There were four cases of non-colon cancers, all with liver metastases., Results: LHAC alone averaged 45-55 minutes. Mean blood loss of 151 cc (20-300 cc). Postoperatively, 16 patients (59.2%) had hepatic intra-arterial chemotherapy in the recovery room as a preplanned protocol. Average hospital stay was 8.4 days (3-25 days). Median follow-up period of 8.1 months. 22 patients with residual hepatic disease, in whom chemotherapy was successfully instituted, showed regression of their metastases, in 18 patients, CEA had improved at their one-month follow-up visit. Three complications: one catheter thrombosis, one partial catheter occlusion and one eroded catheter into the duodenum one year after., Conclusions: In experienced hands, laparoscopic hepatic artery catheterization is a safe, feasible and minimally invasive technique for those patients with metachronous liver malignancies.

Background: In contrast to other extracorporeal treatments no established regime exists for anticoagulation with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) in plasmapheresis therapy. A study was conducted to investigate whether LMWH (dalteparin-Na) is suitable as an effective anticoagulant in plasmapheresis therapy., Study Design and Methods: Eleven patients with autoimmune neurological diseases and the necessity for a plasmapheresis therapy were enrolled. A capillary membrane filter was used. A total of 2000 mL of human plasma was isovolumetrically exchanged per plasmapheresis cycle. The anticoagulation was accomplished with a single bolus of LMWH (dalteparin) of 80 to 90 IU per kg of body weight. The system was visually monitored. Anti-factor (F)Xa activity, thrombin-antithrombin III complex (TAT), and prothrombin fragment 1+2 (F 1+2) were determined at regular intervals. Samples were taken from the collected plasma pool to determine the loss of LMWH during the plasmapheresis procedure., Results: All plasmapheresis cycles with LMWH were successful without complications. Approximately 40 percent of the initially administered LMWH bolus was lost by the large porous filter during the plasmapheresis. The anti-FXa values were determined to be 0.5 IU per mL during the entire plasmapheresis. TAT values were elevated (TAT median, 14.3 microg/L). F 1+2 values measured before the filter cartridge remained within the normal range for the entire plasmapheresis cycle (<1.2 nmol/L) and were increasingly elevated after the filter., Conclusion: Our initial experiences with LMWH for anticoagulation in plasmapheresis indicate that a body weight adjusted dose of LMWH (dalteparin) is suitable for anticoagulation in plasmapheresis therapy. No complications were observed. The data are encouraging. Further investigations will show if and how the present anticoagulation regime could be further optimized.

Freshly isolated ciliary body explants and tips of ciliary processes derived from human eyes were cultured in serum-containing or serum-free defined medium. These cultures synthesized tissue-bound and medium-released ("excreted") glycosaminoglycans (GAGs), as evidenced by the incorporation of 14C-glucosamine and enzymatic characterization of these labelled GAGs (hyaluronic acid, heparan sulphate, chondroitin sulphate, dermatan sulphate). The GAG synthesis and excretion rate was enhanced by serum. It is suggested that ciliary epithelium performs this function of GAG synthesis also under in vivo conditions.

Explants of two types of chamber angle tissue derived from five human autopsy eyes and five freshly enucleated monkey eyes were kept under tissue culture conditions for 1-3 days and then incubated with labelled 14C-glucosamine for 40-48 h. In all specimens an intense labelling was seen histoautoradiographically within the area of the trabecular meshwork, especially in the cribriform layer and the outer wall of Schlemm's canal. Large quantities of silver grains were also found at the tips of the ciliary processes where the nonpigmented epithelium showed the most intense labelling. Measuring the total radioactivity of the two types of specimens in the tissue-localized and the medium-released glycosaminoglycans (GAGs), we found that the type 1 specimens containing only trabecular meshwork work and corneosclera "excrete" relatively more GAGs into the medium than the type 2 specimens consisting of corneosclera, trabecular meshwork and ciliary body. Biochemical analysis of these GAGs revealed that 57%-70% of the tissue GAGs were hyaluronic acid, 16%-33% heparan sulphate and 12%-22% various types of chondroitin sulphate. The findings show that both the ciliary epithelium and the trabecular meshwork possesses the ability to synthesize large amounts of GAGs, probably in the form of proteoglycans. The differences between the in vitro behaviour of type 1 and type 2 specimens indicate a functional interrelationship between the ciliary body and the trabecular meshwork, at least with regard to the GAG metabolism.