Search

Background: Angiosarcoma is a rare and aggressive cancer of the endothelial cells. Propranolol, a non-selective β-blocker, was able to initiate apoptosis in angiosarcoma cell lines and its anti-tumor activity has been described in several case reports. The aim of this trial was to prospectively evaluate the anti-tumor activity of propranolol monotherapy in patients with angiosarcoma before proceeding to standard of care treatment., Methods: Propranolol was dosed 80 mg to 240 mg/day for 3 to 6 weeks according to a dose titration schedule. The primary endpoint was clinical response (response according to RECIST 1.1 or stable disease with improvement of cutaneous lesions) in at least three patients. Exploratory objectives included histologic response (>30% decrease in Ki-67), FDG PET response, and β-receptor expression levels., Results: Fourteen patients were enrolled. The median duration of treatment was 26 days (range 21-42 days). The median highest propranolol dose was 160 mg/day (range 80 - 240 mg). Two patients showed clinical response (14%, 95% CI 3-100%). One of these patients showed a partial metabolic response on PET-CT. None of the tumors showed histologic response. The most common adverse event was grade 1/2 bradycardia (86%). There were no grade ≥ 3 adverse events. ADRB2 was overexpressed in 16 out of 18 tumors, in both responders and non-responders. None of the tumors showed ADRB1 overexpression., Conclusions: This window-of-opportunity trial did not show clinical efficacy of propranolol monotherapy. However, two out of 14 patients did show clinical benefit. ADRB1/2 expression did not correlate with clinical response., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Neoadjuvant imatinib is considered for gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) when decreased tumor size provides less extensive surgery and higher R0 resection rates. This study evaluates the effectivity and safety of neoadjuvant imatinib for large or locally advanced GIST., Patients and Methods: From the prospective database of the Dutch GIST Consortium, all patients who underwent surgery after neoadjuvant imatinib at our center between 2009 and 2022 were selected. Independent and blinded assessment of surgical strategy was performed by two surgeons, based on anonymized computed tomography (CT) scans before and after neoadjuvant imatinib., Results: Of 113 patients that received neoadjuvant imatinib, 108 (95%) [mean age 61.6, standard deviation (SD) 11.5, 54% male] underwent a GIST resection. Of all GISTs, 67% was localized in the stomach and 25% in the duodenum or small intestine. In 74% of the patients with GIST, a KIT exon 11 mutation was found. Decreased tumor size was seen in 95 (88%) patients. Having a KIT exon 11 mutation [odds ratio (OR) 5.64, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.67-19.1, p < 0.01] or not having a mutation (OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.04-0.89, p = 0.04) were positive and negative predictive values for partial response, respectively. In 55 (51%) patients, there was deescalation of surgical strategy after neoadjuvant imatinib. Surgical complications were documented in 16 (15%) patients (n = 8, grade II; n = 5, grade IIIa; n = 3, grade IIIb) and R0 resection was accomplished in 95 (89%) patients. The 5-year disease-free and overall survival were 80% and 91%, respectively., Conclusion: This study shows that neoadjuvant imatinib is effective and safe for patients with large or locally advanced GIST., (© 2023. Society of Surgical Oncology.)

Purpose: A prior phase I study showed that the neo-adjuvant combination of pazopanib and radiotherapy was well tolerated, and induced promising pathological responses in soft-tissue sarcoma patients. Results of the subsequent prospective, multicenter phase II, PASART-2 trial are presented here, further investigating the efficacy and safety of this combination., Patients and Methods: Patients with high-risk, localized soft-tissue sarcoma received neo-adjuvant radiotherapy, 50 Gy in 25 fractions (PASART-2A) or with a subsequent dose de-escalation to 36 Gy in 18 fractions (PASART-2B). This was combined with 800 mg once daily pazopanib, which started one week before radiotherapy and finished simultaneously. After an interval of 4-8 weeks, surgical resection was performed. The primary endpoint was the rate of pathological complete responses (pCR), defined as ≤5% viable cells., Results: 25 patients were registered in the study, 21 in PASART-2A and 4 in PASART-2B. After central pathology review, the combination treatment led to a pCR in 5 patients (20%). 17 patients (68%) experienced grade 3+ toxicities during neo-adjuvant treatment, of which the most common were alanine aminotransferase (ALT) elevation, aspartate aminotransferase (AST) elevation, and hypertension, all asymptomatic. Grade 3+ acute post-operative toxicities occurred in 5 patients (20%), of which the most common was wound infection. All patients completed the full radiotherapy regimen and underwent surgery. Pazopanib was discontinued before completion in 9 patients (36%), due to elevated ALT and/or AST, and shortly interrupted in 2 patients (8%), due to hypertension., Conclusion: Apart from asymptomatic hepatotoxicity, the study regimen was well tolerated. Although the pre-specified efficacy endpoint (30% pCR) was not met, a more than doubling of historical pCR rates after neo-adjuvant radiotherapy alone was observed, which warrants further investigation.

Introduction: Angiosarcoma is a rare and aggressive malignancy with a high metastatic potential and recurrence rate. Despite optimal treatment with surgery, with or without radiation, the prognosis remains poor and, therefore, new treatment strategies are warranted. Recently, propranolol has effectively been repurposed for the treatment of infantile haemangioma. Propranolol is a β3-sparing antagonist of the β-adrenergic receptor. In infantile haemangioma, the β1, β2 and β3 receptors are highly expressed. Angiosarcoma has several similarities with haemangioma, including its high β-adrenergic receptor expression and the supposedly important role of vascular endothelial growth factor in malignant growth. As a result, propranolol has been administered small scale in individual angiosarcoma cases with promising results. The precise effect of propranolol, however, is not yet established., Methods and Analysis: The goal of this neoadjuvant window of opportunity study is to prospectively evaluate the activity of propranolol monotherapy in patients with cutaneous angiosarcoma. The neoadjuvant setting provides a good opportunity to rapidly evaluate both the clinical response and histological response, without a significant delay in standard anticancer treatment. Fourteen patients with primary, recurrent or metastatic cutaneous angiosarcoma will be included. Propranolol will be administered orally in an escalating dose during 3-6 weeks, before the initiation of standard treatment. The primary endpoint is clinical response according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours, as measured on consecutive coloured photographs or CT/MRI. The histological response will be determined as secondary endpoint, comparing the difference in proliferation index before and after propranolol by measuring the change in immunohistochemistry staining of Ki-67. The study will be considered positive when at least three patients have a response to propranolol., Ethics and Dissemination: Ethical approval was obtained from the Medical Ethical Committee of the Netherlands Cancer Institute. Independent of the outcome, results of this study will be shared and submitted for publication in an international peer-reviewed journal., Trial Registration Number: NL8118; registry through the Netherlands Trial Register., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Aim: Higher imatinib exposure is correlated with longer time to progression, while the variability in exposure is high. This provides a strong rationale for therapeutic drug monitoring, which has therefore been implemented in routine clinical practice in our institute. The aim of this study is to evaluate whether pharmacokinetically (PK)-guided dose increases are feasible in daily clinical practice and result in an improved exposure (C min ≥1100 ng/mL) and longer progression-free survival (PFS)., Methods: This retrospective study included all patients with a gastrointestinal stromal tumour (GIST) in the Netherlands Cancer Institute who started imatinib treatment at a dose of 400 mg and of whom PK plasma samples were available. Of these patients, minimum plasma concentrations (C min ) of imatinib, frequency and successfulness of PK-guided dose increases and PFS in the palliative treatment setting were analysed., Results: In total, 169 consecutive patients were included, of whom 1402 PK samples were collected. In 126 patients (75%), C min was below the efficacy threshold of 1100 ng/mL. In 78 of these patients (62%), a PK-guided dose increase was performed, which was successful in 49 patients (63%). PFS was similar in patients with and without imatinib dose increase. However, due to the small number of patients with progressive disease, no definite conclusions on the effect on PFS could yet be drawn., Conclusion: This is the largest cohort evaluating PK-guided dose increases of imatinib in patients with GIST in routine clinical practice and demonstrating its feasibility. PK-guided dose increases should be applied to optimise exposure in the significant subset of patients with a low C min ., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement J.H.B. reports receiving research grants for the institute from Astex, PharmaMar and Roche (outside the submitted work) and is a part time employee, patent holder and stock holder of Modra Pharmaceuticals (a spin-out company developing oral taxane formulations, not related to this study). N.S. reports receiving research grants for the institute from AB Science, Abbvie, Actuate Therapeutics, Amgen, Array, AstraZeneca/MedImmune, Bayer, Blueprint Medicines, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cantargia, Cytovation, Deciphera, Genentech/Roche, GlaxoSmithKline, Incyte, InteRNA, Lilly, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Merus, Novartis, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, Roche, Sanofi and Takeda (all outside the submitted work). The other authors declare no competing conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The outcome of patients with macroscopic stage III melanoma is poor. Neoadjuvant treatment with ipilimumab plus nivolumab at the standard dosing schedule induced pathological responses in a high proportion of patients in two small independent early-phase trials, and no patients with a pathological response have relapsed after a median follow up of 32 months. However, toxicity of the standard ipilimumab plus nivolumab dosing schedule was high, preventing its broader clinical use. The aim of the OpACIN-neo trial was to identify a dosing schedule of ipilimumab plus nivolumab that is less toxic but equally effective., Methods: OpACIN-neo is a multicentre, open-label, phase 2, randomised, controlled trial. Eligible patients were aged at least 18 years, had a WHO performance status of 0-1, had resectable stage III melanoma involving lymph nodes only, and measurable disease according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Patients were enrolled from three medical centres in Australia, Sweden, and the Netherlands, and were randomly assigned (1:1:1), stratified by site, to one of three neoadjuvant dosing schedules: group A, two cycles of ipilimumab 3 mg/kg plus nivolumab 1 mg/kg once every 3 weeks intravenously; group B, two cycles of ipilimumab 1 mg/kg plus nivolumab 3 mg/kg once every 3 weeks intravenously; or group C, two cycles of ipilimumab 3 mg/kg once every 3 weeks directly followed by two cycles of nivolumab 3 mg/kg once every 2 weeks intravenously. The investigators, site staff, and patients were aware of the treatment assignment during the study participation. Pathologists were masked to treatment allocation and all other data. The primary endpoints were the proportion of patients with grade 3-4 immune-related toxicity within the first 12 weeks and the proportion of patients achieving a radiological objective response and pathological response at 6 weeks. Analyses were done in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02977052, and is ongoing with an additional extension cohort and to complete survival analysis., Findings: Between Nov 24, 2016 and June 28, 2018, 105 patients were screened for eligibility, of whom 89 (85%) eligible patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to one of the three groups. Three patients were excluded after randomisation because they were found to be ineligible, and 86 received at least one dose of study drug; 30 patients in group A, 30 in group B, and 26 in group C (accrual to this group was closed early upon advice of the Data Safety Monitoring Board on June 4, 2018 because of severe adverse events). Within the first 12 weeks, grade 3-4 immune-related adverse events were observed in 12 (40%) of 30 patients in group A, six (20%) of 30 in group B, and 13 (50%) of 26 in group C. The difference in grade 3-4 toxicity between group B and A was -20% (95% CI -46 to 6; p=0·158) and between group C and group A was 10% (-20 to 40; p=0·591). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were elevated liver enzymes in group A (six [20%)]) and colitis in group C (five [19%]); in group B, none of the grade 3-4 adverse events were seen in more than one patient. One patient (in group A) died 9·5 months after the start of treatment due to the consequences of late-onset immune-related encephalitis, which was possibly treatment-related. 19 (63% [95% CI 44-80]) of 30 patients in group A, 17 (57% [37-75]) of 30 in group B, and nine (35% [17-56]) of 26 in group C achieved a radiological objective response, while pathological responses occurred in 24 (80% [61-92]) patients in group A, 23 (77% [58-90]) in group B, and 17 (65% [44-83]) in group C., Interpretation: OpACIN-neo identified a tolerable neoadjuvant dosing schedule (group B: two cycles of ipilimumab 1 mg/kg plus nivolumab 3 mg/kg) that induces a pathological response in a high proportion of patients and might be suitable for broader clinical use. When more mature data confirm these early observations, this schedule should be tested in randomised phase 3 studies versus adjuvant therapies, which are the current standard-of-care systemic therapy for patients with stage III melanoma., Funding: Bristol-Myers Squibb., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background/aim: Pazopanib is approved for advanced soft tissue sarcoma (STS) patients. The aim of the study was to examine the usefulness of ( 18 F)-Fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography/ computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) imaging for early evaluation of the response of STS patients to pazopanib, as well as the association between pazopanib pharmacokinetics and early metabolic response., Patients and Methods: Twenty STS patients underwent FDG-PET scans at baseline, two- and eight-weeks following treatment with pazopanib. The FDG-PET scans were evaluated by quantitative PERCIST analysis and visually by an independent nuclear medicine physician and related to RECIST1.1 outcome at eight weeks., Results: After eight weeks of therapy, 14 out of 20 patients had discontinued pazopanib due to tumor progression identified radiologically ('non-responders' n=12) or toxicity (n=2). Quantitative FDG-PET scoring at two weeks, according to PERCIST guidelines, identified 25% (3 of 12) of the patients radiologically as non-responders versus 42% (5 of 12) identified by visual response analysis., Conclusion: In this heterogeneous STS patients' cohort, early FDG-PET/CT identified a substantial part of pazopanib non-responders., (Copyright© 2019, International Institute of Anticancer Research (Dr. George J. Delinasios), All rights reserved.)