Search

Identifying pan-tumor biomarkers that predict responses to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) is critically needed. In the AMADEUS clinical trial (NCT03651271), patients with various advanced solid tumors were assessed for changes in intratumoral CD8 percentages and their response to ICI. Patients were grouped based on tumoral CD8 levels: those with CD8

Abstract Cancer cells with BRCA1/2 deficiencies are sensitive to poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors. We evaluated the efficacy of talazoparib in DNA-Damage Repair (DDR)-altered patients. In this phase II trial, patients were enrolled onto one of four cohorts based on molecular alterations: (1) somatic BRCA1/2, (2) other homologous recombination repair pathway, (3) PTEN and (4) germline BRCA1/2. The primary endpoint was a clinical benefit rate (CBR): complete response, partial response or stable disease ≥24 weeks. 79 patients with a median of 4 lines of therapy were enrolled. CBR for cohorts 1–4 were: 32.5%, 19.7%, 9.4% and 30.6%, respectively. PTEN mutations correlated with reduced survival and a trend towards shorter time to progression.Talazoparib demonstrated clinical benefit in selected DDR-altered patients. PTEN mutations/loss patients derived limited clinical benefit. Further study is needed to determine whether PTEN is prognostic or predictive of response to PARP inhibitors.

Objective To evaluate signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3) inhibition we conducted a co-clinical trial testing danvatirsen, a STAT3 antisense oligonucleotide (ASO) and checkpoint inhibition in conjunction with preclinical experiments.Methods and analysis Orthotopically implanted pancreatic cancer (pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC)) was treated with STAT3 ASO with immune checkpoint inhibition. Tumour infiltrating immune cell populations were characterised via flow cytometry. In vitro experiments evaluated STAT3 inhibition in pancreatic stellate cells (PSCs) and myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs).A phase II trial employing a Simon II stage design tested the clinical efficacy of danvatirsen and durvalumab in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), PDAC and mismatch repair-deficient colorectal cancer (MRD CRC). The primary objective was 4-month disease control rate (DCR).Results In vivo studies identified improvement in survival of PDAC implanted mice treated with STAT3 ASO and checkpoint inhibition. Within tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes there was expansion of CD4 and PD-1+ CD8 populations with STAT3 ASO.Thirty-seven patients (29 PDAC, 7 NSCLC and 1 MRD CRC) from a single institution started treatment on trial between April 2017 and March 2020. No objective responses were observed. Four of six (66.7%, 95% CI 22.3% to 95.7%) NSCLC and 4 of 23 (17.4%, 95% CI 5% to 38.8%) PDAC patients exhibited 4-month DCR. Follow-up in vitro studies revealed an anti-inflammatory and pro-tumour effect of STAT3 ASO mediated by PSCs and MDSCs distinct from ablation of STAT3.Conclusion Although durvalumab and danvatirsen met the primary endpoint, no objective responses were observed. A rationale for the lack of objective responses is danvatirsen-induced myeloid immune suppression.Trial registration number NCT02983578.

Rationale of the trial Although the use of engineered T cells in cancer immunotherapy has greatly advanced the treatment of hematological malignancies, reaching meaningful clinical responses in the treatment of solid tumors is still challenging. We investigated the safety and tolerability of IMA202 in a first-in-human, dose escalation basket trial in human leucocyte antigen A*02:01 positive patients with melanoma-associated antigen A1 (MAGEA1)-positive advanced solid tumors.Trial design The 2+2 trial design was an algorithmic design based on a maximally acceptable dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) rate of 25% and the sample size was driven by the algorithmic design with a maximum of 16 patients. IMA202 consists of autologous genetically modified cytotoxic CD8+ T cells expressing a T cell receptor (TCR), which is specific for a nine amino acid peptide derived from MAGEA1. Eligible patients underwent leukapheresis, T cells were isolated, transduced with lentiviral vector carrying MAGEA1-specific TCR and following lymphodepletion (fludarabine/cyclophosphamide), infused with a median of 1.4×109 specific T cells (range, 0.086×109–2.57×109) followed by interleukin 2.Safety of IMA202 No DLT was observed. The most common grade 3–4 adverse events were cytopenias, that is, neutropenia (81.3%), lymphopenia (75.0%), anemia (50.0%), thrombocytopenia (50.0%) and leukopenia (25.0%). 13 patients experienced cytokine release syndrome, including one grade 3 event. Immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome was observed in two patients and was grade 1 in both.Efficacy of IMA202 Of the 16 patients dosed, 11 (68.8%) patients had stable disease (SD) as their best overall response (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors V.1.1). Five patients had initial tumor shrinkage in target lesions and one patient with SD experienced continued shrinkage in target lesions for 3 months in total but had to be classified as progressive disease due to progressive non-target lesions. IMA202 T cells were persistent in peripheral blood for several weeks to months and were also detectable in tumor tissue. Peak persistence was higher in patients who received higher doses.Conclusion In conclusion, IMA202 had a manageable safety profile, and it was associated with biological and potential clinical activity of MAGEA1-targeting genetically engineered TCR-T cells in a poor prognosis, multi-indication solid tumor cohort.Trial registration numbers NCT04639245, NCT05430555.

Transcriptomics, which encompasses assessments of alternative splicing and alternative polyadenylation, identification of fusion transcripts, explorations of noncoding RNAs, transcript annotation, and discovery of novel transcripts, is a valuable tool for understanding cancer mechanisms and identifying biomarkers. Recent advances in high-throughput technologies have enabled large-scale gene expression profiling. Importantly, RNA expression profiling of tumor tissue has been successfully used to determine clinically actionable molecular alterations. The WINTHER precision medicine clinical trial was the first prospective trial in diverse solid malignancies that assessed both genomics and transcriptomics to match treatments to specific molecular alterations. The use of transcriptome analysis in WINTHER and other trials increased the number of targetable -omic changes compared to genomic profiling alone. Other applications of transcriptomics involve the evaluation of tumor and circulating noncoding RNAs as predictive and prognostic biomarkers, the improvement of risk stratification by the use of prognostic and predictive multigene assays, the identification of fusion transcripts that drive tumors, and an improved understanding of the impact of DNA changes as some genomic alterations are silenced at the RNA level. Finally, RNA sequencing and gene expression analysis have been incorporated into clinical trials to identify markers predicting response to immunotherapy. Many issues regarding the complexity of the analysis, its reproducibility and variability, and the interpretation of the results still need to be addressed. The integration of transcriptomics with genomics, proteomics, epigenetics, and tumor immune profiling will improve biomarker discovery and our understanding of disease mechanisms and, thereby, accelerate the implementation of precision oncology.

A patient in his 40s with splenic angiosarcoma metastatic to the liver underwent splenectomy, chemotherapy, and partial hepatectomy before being treated on a clinical trial with CTLA4 and PD1 inhibitors. He had received pneumococcal and meningococcal vaccines post-splenectomy. On week 10, he developed grade 3 immune-related colitis, successfully treated with the anti-tumor necrosis factor-alpha inhibitor infliximab and steroids. After 4 cycles of treatment, scans showed partial response. He resumed anti-PD1 therapy, and 6 hours after the second dose of anti-PD1 he presented to the emergency room with hematemesis, hematochezia, hypotension, fever, and oxygen desaturation. Laboratory tests demonstrated acute renal failure and septicemia (Streptococcus pneumoniae). He died 12 hours after the anti-PD1 infusion from overwhelming post-splenectomy infection (OPSI). Autopsy demonstrated non-viable liver tumors among other findings. In conclusion, patients undergoing immunotherapy and with prior history of asplenia should be monitored closely for OPSI as they may be at increased risk.

Abstract T cell differentiation is a highly regulated, multi-step process necessary for the progressive establishment of effector functions, immunological memory, and long-term control of pathogens. In response to strong stimulation, as seen in severe or chronic infections or cancer, T cells acquire a state of hypo-responsiveness known as exhaustion, limiting their effector function. Recent advances in autologous chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cell therapies have revolutionized the treatment of hematologic malignancies by taking advantage of the basic principles of T cell biology to engineer products that promote long-lasting T cell response. However, many patients’ malignancies remain unresponsive to treatment or are prone to recur. Discoveries in T cell biology, including the identification of key regulators of differentiation and exhaustion, offer novel opportunities to have a durable impact on the fate of CAR-T cells after infusion. Such next-generation CAR-T cell therapies and their clinical implementation may result in the next leap forward in cancer treatment for selected patients. In this context, this review summarizes the foundational principles of T cell differentiation and exhaustion and describes how they can be utilized and targeted to further improve the design and efficacy of CAR-T cell therapies.

Poly (adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARP)i are emerging as standard oncology treatments in various tumor types. The indications will expand as PARPi are being investigated in various breast cancer subtypes. Currently, except for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative breast cancer, there is inadequate identification of predictive biomarkers of response. We present a 57-year-old woman with metastatic breast cancer, hormone-receptor-positive, HER2 negative with a germline ataxia-telangiectasia mutation with a large brain metastasis with clinical benefit to talazoparib. This case report exemplifies the importance of the multidisciplinary management of patients with brain metastases and personalized biomarker selected treatment.

ABSTRACTTo overcome challenges associated with adoptive cell therapy (ACT), we developed a personalized autologous T-cell therapy program. Patients with advanced cancer with HLA-A *02:01 allele and tumor expression of PRAME, MAGEA1, MAGEA4, MAGEA8, NY-ESO-1, COL6A3 exon 6, MXRA5, and/or MMP1 underwent leukapheresis and T-cell product manufacturing. Patients received lymphodepletion, IMA101 infusion and interleukin 2 for 14 days. Of 214 screened patients, 14 were treated (6, IMA101; 8, IMA101 and atezolizumab). The most common adverse events were cytokine release syndrome (G1, n = 6; G2, n = 4) and cytopenia. At 6 weeks, 12 (85.7%) patients had stable disease. Three patients had prolonged disease stabilization for 12.9, 7.3, and 13.7 months, respectively. The median progression-free survival and overall survival were 3.4 months and 9.4 months, respectively. Target-specific T cells expanded to constitute up to 78.7% of CD8+ cells. In conclusion, IMA101 was feasible and well tolerated, leveraging the potential of multi-targeted ACT that warrants further investigation.

We performed a literature search in PubMed to identify phase I/II clinical trials with immunotherapy drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration (labeled, off-label, and/or combined with investigational immune checkpoint inhibitors or other treatment modalities) from 2018 to 2020. We used the following key words: clinical trials, phase 1, Phase 2; and the following filters: cancer, humans; and selected the checkpoint inhibitors that had been approved by the FDA by March 2021, i.e., “pembrolizumab”, “nivolumab”, “atezolizumab”, “durvalumab”, “cemiplimab”, “avelumab”, and “ipilimumab. Clinical trials with their checkpoint inhibitors as in their labeled indications, off-label use or their combinations with investigational immune checkpoint inhibitors or other treatment modalities were included. Studies describing supportive care or locoregional treatments; cellular, viral, or vaccine therapy; studies in the adjuvant or neoadjuvant setting; and pediatric studies were excluded. Overall, 173 articles reporting on relevant studies were identified. Using these articles, we compiled a data file of study-specific covariates for each study. We recorded the immunotherapeutic agent, tumor type and biomarker, and clinical outcomes (objective response rate and median values [point estimate] and confidence intervals for progression-free survival and overall survival. Using these data, we carried out meta-analyses for the three outcomes and meta-regression on study-specific covariates. The same data could be used for any alternative implementation of meta-analysis and meta-regression, using more structured inference models reflecting different levels of dependence based on the available study-specific covariates.

Abstract An 80-year-old man with no history of an immune-compromising disorder was diagnosed with progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML). He presented with dysphagia and left-sided weakness; magnetic resonance imaging demonstrated marked signal abnormality in the subcortical white matter of the left frontal lobe and in the posterior limb of the right internal capsule. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) analysis of the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) was negative for John Cunningham (JC) virus. On brain biopsy, foamy macrophages infiltrating the white matter were identified, staining positive for anti-simian virus 40 antibodies. Postoperatively, PCR for JC viral DNA in the CSF was positive, establishing the diagnosis of PML. Extensive investigation for an occult immunocompromising disorder was negative. The patient's neurologic deficits rapidly increased throughout his hospital stay, and he died 3.5 months after his diagnosis.

Abstract Pre-clinically, the mTORC1/2 inhibitor sapanisertib restored sensitivity to platinums and enhanced paclitaxel-induced cancer cell killing. NCT03430882 enrolled patients with mTOR pathway aberrant tumors to receive sapanisertib, carboplatin and paclitaxel. Primary objective was safety and secondary objectives were clinical response and survival. One patient had a dose-limiting toxicity at dose level 4. There were no unanticipated toxicities. Grade 3–4 treatment-related adverse events included anemia (21%), neutropenia (21%), thrombocytopenia (10.5%), and transaminitis (5%). Of 17 patients evaluable for response, 2 and 11 patients achieved partial response and stable disease, respectively. Responders included a patient with unclassified renal cell carcinoma harboring EWSR1-POU5F1 fusion and a patient with castrate resistant prostate cancer harboring PTEN loss. Median progression free survival was 3.84 months. Sapanisertib in combination with carboplatin plus paclitaxel demonstrated a manageable safety profile, with preliminary antitumor activity observed in advanced malignancies harboring mTOR pathway alterations.

Transcriptomics, which encompasses assessments of alternative splicing and alternative polyadenylation, identification of fusion transcripts, explorations of noncoding RNAs, transcript annotation, and discovery of novel transcripts, is a valuable tool for understanding cancer mechanisms and identifying biomarkers. Recent advances in high-throughput technologies have enabled large-scale gene expression profiling. Importantly, RNA expression profiling of tumor tissue has been successfully used to determine clinically actionable molecular alterations. The WINTHER precision medicine clinical trial was the first prospective trial in diverse solid malignancies that assessed both genomics and transcriptomics to match treatments to specific molecular alterations. The use of transcriptome analysis in WINTHER and other trials increased the number of targetable -omic changes compared to genomic profiling alone. Other applications of transcriptomics involve the evaluation of tumor and circulating noncoding RNAs as predictive and prognostic biomarkers, the improvement of risk stratification by the use of prognostic and predictive multigene assays, the identification of fusion transcripts that drive tumors, and an improved understanding of the impact of DNA changes as some genomic alterations are silenced at the RNA level. Finally, RNA sequencing and gene expression analysis have been incorporated into clinical trials to identify markers predicting response to immunotherapy. Many issues regarding the complexity of the analysis, its reproducibility and variability, and the interpretation of the results still need to be addressed. The integration of transcriptomics with genomics, proteomics, epigenetics, and tumor immune profiling will improve biomarker discovery and our understanding of disease mechanisms and, thereby, accelerate the implementation of precision oncology.

In recent years, biotechnological breakthroughs have led to identification of complex and unique biologic features associated with carcinogenesis. Tumor and cell-free DNA profiling, immune markers, and proteomic and RNA analyses are used to identify these characteristics for optimization of anticancer therapy in individual patients. Consequently, clinical trials have evolved, shifting from tumor type-centered to gene-directed, histology-agnostic, with innovative adaptive design tailored to biomarker profiling with the goal to improve treatment outcomes. A plethora of precision medicine trials have been conducted. The majority of these trials demonstrated that matched therapy is associated with superior outcomes compared to non-matched therapy across tumor types and in specific cancers. To improve the implementation of precision medicine, this approach should be used early in the course of the disease, and patients should have complete tumor profiling and access to effective matched therapy. To overcome the complexity of tumor biology, clinical trials with combinations of gene-targeted therapy with immune-targeted approaches (e.g., checkpoint blockade, personalized vaccines and/or chimeric antigen receptor T-cells), hormonal therapy, chemotherapy and/or novel agents should be considered. These studies should target dynamic changes in tumor biologic abnormalities, eliminating minimal residual disease, and eradicating significant subclones that confer resistance to treatment. Mining and expansion of real-world data, facilitated by the use of advanced computer data processing capabilities, may contribute to validation of information to predict new applications for medicines. In this review, we summarize the clinical trials and discuss challenges and opportunities to accelerate the implementation of precision oncology.

Abstract Combined BRAF + MEK inhibition is FDA approved for BRAF V600E-mutant solid tumors except for colorectal cancer. However, beyond MAPK mediated resistance several other mechanisms of resistance such as activation of CRAF, ARAF, MET, P13K/AKT/mTOR pathway exist among other complex pathways. In the VEM-PLUS study, we performed a pooled analysis of four phase one studies evaluating the safety and efficacy of vemurafenib monotherapy and vemurafenib combined with targeted therapies (sorafenib, crizotinib, or everolimus) or carboplatin plus paclitaxel in advanced solid tumors harboring BRAF V600 mutations. When vemurafenib monotherapy was compared with the combination regimens, no significant differences in OS or PFS durations were noted, except for inferior OS in the vemurafenib and paclitaxel and carboplatin trial (P = 0.011; HR, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.22–4.7) and in crossover patients (P = 0.0025; HR, 2.089; 95% CI, 1.2–3.4). Patients naïve to prior BRAF inhibitors had statistically significantly improved OS at 12.6 months compared to 10.4 months in the BRAF therapy refractory group (P = 0.024; HR, 1.69; 95% CI 1.07–2.68). The median PFS was statistically significant between both groups, with 7 months in the BRAF therapy naïve group compared to 4.7 months in the BRAF therapy refractory group (P = 0.016; HR, 1.80; 95% CI 1.11–2.91). The confirmed ORR in the vemurafenib monotherapy trial (28%) was higher than that in the combination trials. Our findings suggest that, compared with vemurafenib monotherapy, combinations of vemurafenib with cytotoxic chemotherapy or with RAF- or mTOR-targeting agents do not significantly extend the OS or PFS of patients who have solid tumors with BRAF V600E mutations. Gaining a better understanding of the molecular mechanisms of BRAF inhibitor resistance, balancing toxicity and efficacy with novel trial designs are warranted.

Introduction: We aimed to identify clinical, pathologic, and treatment factors that are predictive of response and survival in patients with cervical cancer referred to phase I clinical trials. Methods: Patients with cervical cancer who received at least one dose of a phase I investigational agent at our institution between 2014 and 2022 were included. The log-rank test was used to analyze differences in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), and multivariable regression analysis was performed. Results: We included 65 patients with a median age of 41 years (range, 20–74), 3 prior therapies (range, 1–7), and 67.7% squamous carcinoma. The rate of distant metastasis at trial entry was 84.6%. The most common molecular alterations included PIK3CA (46.5%), PD-L1+ (46.2%), EPH (30.0%), and CREBBP (23.1%); 23.1% had received a prior checkpoint inhibitor. Phase I trials were for immunotherapy (58.5%) or targeted therapy (41.5%). The rate of biomarker matching was 21.5%. For all patients, median PFS was 3.6 months (95% CI, 2.0–5.2) and OS was 9.3 months (95% CI, 7.0–10.6). Factors at study entry associated with worse survival were presence of bone metastasis (PFS 1.6 vs 4.4 months: hazard ratio [HR], 2.8; p = 0.001; OS 3.8 vs 10.0 months: HR, 3.9; p < 0.0001) and absolute lymphocyte count below 1000/μL (PFS 1.8 vs 5.2 months: HR, 2.9; p = 0.0004; OS 7.0 vs 10.6 months: HR, 3.2; p = 0.0009). Factors associated only with worse OS were absolute neutrophil count above 4700/μL, hemoglobin below 10.5 g/dL, and smoking status. Grade 3+ treatment-related adverse events were seen in 16.9% of cases. Conclusion: Bone metastasis and absolute lymphocyte count below normal range at phase I study entry portend poor survival in patients with recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer.

This open-label, phase I first-in-human study (NCT01915576) of BAY 1125976, a highly specific and potent allosteric inhibitor of AKT1/2, aimed to evaluate the safety, pharmacokinetics, and maximum tolerated dose of BAY 1125976 in patients with advanced solid tumors. Oral dose escalation was investigated with a continuous once daily (QD) treatment (21 days/cycle) and a twice daily (BID) schedule. A dose expansion in 28 patients with hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer, including nine patients harboring the AKT1E17K mutation, was performed at the recommended phase 2 dose (R2D) of 60 mg BID. Dose-limiting toxicities (Grades 3-4) were increased in transaminases, γ-glutamyltransferase (γ-GT), and alkaline phosphatase in four patients in both schedules and stomach pain in one patient. Of the 78 patients enrolled, one patient had a partial response, 30 had stable disease, and 38 had progressive disease. The clinical benefit rate was 27.9% among 43 patients treated at the R2D. AKT1E17K mutation status was not associated with tumor response. Genetic analyses revealed additional mutations that could promote tumor cell growth despite the inhibition of AKT1/2. BAY 1125976 was well tolerated and inhibited AKT1/2 signaling but did not lead to radiologic or clinical tumor responses. Thus, the refinement of a selection of biomarkers for AKT inhibitors is needed to improve their monotherapy activity.

Abstract We investigated the challenges of conducting IMPACT2, an ongoing randomized study that evaluates molecular testing and targeted therapy (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02152254). Patients with metastatic cancer underwent tumor profiling and were randomized between the two arms when eligibility criteria were met (Part A). In Part B, patients who declined randomization could choose the study arm. In Part A, 69 (21.8%) of 317 patients were randomized; 78.2% were not randomized because of non-targetable alterations (39.8%), unavailability of clinical trial (21.8%), other reasons (12.6%), or availability of US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved drugs for the indication (4.1%). In Part B, 32 (20.4%) of 157 patients were offered randomization; 16 accepted and 16 selected their treatment arm; 79.0% were not randomized (patient’s/physician’s choice, 29.3%; treatment selection prior to genomic reports, 16.6%; worsening performance status/death, 12.7%; unavailability of clinical trials, 6.4%; other, 6.4%; non-targetable alterations, 5.7%; or availability of FDA-approved drugs for the indication, 1.9%). In conclusion, although randomized controlled trials have been considered the gold standard for drug development, the execution of randomized trials in precision oncology in the advanced metastatic setting is complicated. We encountered various challenges conducting the IMPACT2 study, a large precision oncology trial in patients with diverse solid tumor types. The adaptive design of IMPACT2 enables patient randomization despite the continual FDA approval of targeted therapies, the evolving tumor biomarker landscape, and the plethora of investigational drugs. Outcomes for randomized patients are awaited.

Abstract Patients with rare solid tumors treated on early phase trials experience toxicities from their tumors and treatments. However, limited data exist to describe the detailed symptom burden suffered by these patients, particularly those with rare solid tumors treated with immunotherapy. We performed a prospective longitudinal study to capture patient-reported symptom burden. Patients completed the validated MD Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI)—Immunotherapy with 20 symptoms including 7 immunotherapy-specific items and 6 interference items at baseline and weekly thereafter for up to 9 weeks. Symptoms and interference were rated on 0–10 scales (0 = none or no interference, 10 = worst imaginable or complete interference). Group-based trajectory modelling determined higher and lower symptom groups. A total of 336 MDASI questionnaires were completed by 53 patients (mean age 55.4y, 53% male) with advanced rare cancers receiving pembrolizumab in a Phase II clinical trial. Symptoms reported as most severe over the course of the treatment over 9 weeks were fatigue [mean (M) = 3.8, SD = 2.3], pain (M = 3.7, SD = 2.9), disturbed sleep (M = 2.7, SD = 2.3), drowsiness (M = 2.6, SD = 2.0) and lack of appetite (M = 2.5, SD = 2.1). Pain in the abdomen (M = 2.2, SD = 2.4), rash (M = 1.1, SD = 1.8) and diarrhea (M = 0.9, SD = 1.5) were less severe. Interference with walking was rated the highest (M = 3.4, SD = 2.8) and relations with others was rated the lowest (M = 2.1, SD = 2.6). Using a composite score based on the five most severe symptoms (fatigue, pain, lack of appetite, feeling drowsy and sleep disturbance), 43% were classified into the high symptom burden group. Using a score based on immunotherapy-specific symptoms (e.g., rash, diarrhea) 33% of patients were included in the high symptom group. Symptom burden stayed relatively stable in the high- and low-symptom burden patient groups from baseline through 9 weeks. Some patients with rare malignancies experienced high symptom burden even at baseline. In patients with rare cancers, symptom trajectories stayed relatively stable over nine weeks of treatment with pembrolizumab. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02721732.

Abstract Recent rapid biotechnological breakthroughs have led to the identification of complex and unique molecular features that drive malignancies. Precision medicine has exploited next-generation sequencing and matched targeted therapy/immunotherapy deployment to successfully transform the outlook for several fatal cancers. Tumor and liquid biopsy genomic profiling and transcriptomic, immunomic, and proteomic interrogation can now all be leveraged to optimize therapy. Multiple new trial designs, including basket and umbrella trials, master platform trials, and N-of-1 patient-centric studies, are beginning to supplant standard phase I, II, and III protocols, allowing for accelerated drug evaluation and approval and molecular-based individualized treatment. Furthermore, real-world data, as well as exploitation of digital apps and structured observational registries, and the utilization of machine learning and/or artificial intelligence, may further accelerate knowledge acquisition. Overall, clinical trials have evolved, shifting from tumor type-centered to gene-directed and histology-agnostic trials, with innovative adaptive designs and personalized combination treatment strategies tailored to individual biomarker profiles. Some, but not all, novel trials now demonstrate that matched therapy correlates with superior outcomes compared to non-matched therapy across tumor types and in specific cancers. To further improve the precision medicine paradigm, the strategy of matching drugs to patients based on molecular features should be implemented earlier in the disease course, and cancers should have comprehensive multi-omic (genomics, transcriptomics, proteomics, immunomic) tumor profiling. To overcome cancer complexity, moving from drug-centric to patient-centric individualized combination therapy is critical. This review focuses on the design, advantages, limitations, and challenges of a spectrum of clinical trial designs in the era of precision oncology.

Abstract Cyclin E is frequently encoded by CCNE1 gene amplification in various malignancies. We reviewed the medical records of patients with solid tumors displaying CCNE1 amplification to determine the effect of this amplification for future therapeutic development. We reviewed the medical records of patients with advanced solid tumors harboring CCNE1 amplification who were seen at the phase I clinic between September 1, 2012, and December 31, 2019. Among 79 patients with solid tumors harboring CCNE1 amplification, 56 (71%) received phase 1 clinical trial therapy, 39 (49%) had 3 or more concurrent genomic aberrances, and 52 (66%) had a concurrent TP53 mutation. The median overall survival (OS) after patients’ initial phase I visit was 8.9 months and after their initial metastasis diagnosis was 41.4 months. We identified four factors associated with poor risk: age upper limit of normal. In patients treated with gene aberration-related therapy, anti-angiogenic therapy led to significantly longer OS after their initial phase I trial therapy than those who did not: 26 months versus 7.4 months, respectively (P = 0.04). This study provided preliminary evidence that CCNE1 amplification was associated with frequent TP53 mutation and aggressive clinical outcomes. Survival benefit was observed in patients who received antiangiogenic therapy and gene aberration-related treatment, supporting the future development of a personalized approach to combine gene aberration-related therapy with antiangiogenesis for the treatment of advanced malignancies harboring CCNE1 amplification.

Breast and ovarian cancers pose significant therapeutic challenges. We explored the synergistic cytotoxicity of histone deacetylase inhibitors (HDACis), poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPis), and decitabine in breast (MDA-MB-231 and MCF-7) and ovarian (HEY-T30 and SKOV-3) cancer cell lines that were exposed to HDACi (panobinostat or vorinostat), PARPi (talazoparib or olaparib), decitabine, or their combinations. HDACi, PARPi, and decitabine combinations had synergistic cytotoxicity (assessed by MTT and clonogenic assays) in all cell lines (combination index < 1). Clonogenic assays confirmed the sensitivity of breast and ovarian cancer cell lines to the three-drug combinations (panobinostat, talazoparib, and decitabine; panobinostat, olaparib, and decitabine; vorinostat, talazoparib, and decitabine; vorinostat, olaparib, and decitabine). Cell proliferation was inhibited by 48–70%, and Annexin V positivity was 42–59% in all cell lines exposed to the three-drug combinations. Western blot analysis showed protein PARylation inhibition, caspase 3 and PARP1 cleavage, and c-MYC down-regulation. The three-drug combinations induced more DNA damage (increased phosphorylation of histone 2AX) than the individual drugs, impaired the DNA repair pathways, and altered the epigenetic regulation of gene expression. These results indicate that HDACi, PARPi, and decitabine combinations should be further explored in these tumor types. Further clinical validation is warranted to assess their safety and efficacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Arginine depletion interferes with pyrimidine metabolism and DNA damage repair pathways. Preclinical data demonstrated that depletion of arginine by PEGylated arginine deiminase (ADI‐PEG 20) enhanced liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) cytotoxicity in cancer cells with argininosuccinate synthase 1 (ASS1) deficiency. The objective of this study was to assess safety and tolerability of ADI‐PEG 20 and PLD in patients with metastatic solid tumors. Methods Patients with advanced ASS1‐deficient solid tumors were enrolled in this phase 1 trial of ADI‐PEG 20 and PLD following a 3 + 3 design. Eligible patients were given intravenous PLD biweekly and intramuscular (IM) ADI‐PEG 20 weekly. Toxicity and efficacy were evaluated according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (version 4.0) and Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (version 1.1), respectively. Results Of 15 enrolled patients, 9 had metastatic HER2‐negative breast carcinoma. We observed no dose‐limiting toxicities or treatment‐related deaths. One patient safely received 880 mg/m2 PLD in this study and 240 mg/m2 doxorubicin previously. Treatment led to stable disease in 9 patients and was associated with a median progression‐free survival time of 3.95 months in 15 patients. Throughout the duration of treatment, decreased arginine and increased citrulline levels in peripheral blood remained significant in a majority of patients. We detected no induction of anti‐ADI‐PEG 20 antibodies by week 8 in one third of patients. Conclusion Concurrent IM injection of ADI‐PEG 20 at 36 mg/m2 weekly and intravenous infusion of PLD at 20 mg/m2 biweekly had an acceptable safety profile in patients with advanced ASS1‐deficient solid tumors. Further evaluation of this combination is under discussion.

BackgroundOlder adults aged 65 years and above remain underrepresented in cancer clinical trials. We hypothesized that older participation in early phase trials with VEGF/VEGFR (VEGF/R) inhibitors was lower than cancer prevalence in this group and lower than other age groups (middle age, adolescent/young adults [AYA]).ResultsOf 1489 patients, 278 were older adults (18%, median age 68.9y), 220 AYA (15%, median age 32.6 y), 991 middle age (67%, median age 53.8 y). Common malignancies included gastrointestinal (n = 438, 29%), gynecologic (n = 234, 16%), and thoracic/head/neck (n = 216, 15%). Median time to treatment failure did not vary significantly between the 3 age-based cohorts (3m in older adults, 3.5 m middle age, 3.3 m AYA). OR of achieving clinical benefit in older adults vs middle age (OR 1.10, p 0.19 [two-tailed], p 0.09 [one-tailed]) and AYA vs middle age (OR 0.85, p 0.31 [proportions z-test, two tailed], p 0.15 [one-tailed]) showed no significant differences.ConclusionsOlder adults accounted for

BackgroundWe performed a phase I modified 3 + 3 dose escalation study to evaluate the safety and activity of bevacizumab plus gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel in patients with advanced solid tumours.MethodsPatients were given fixed dose gemcitabine plus increasing doses of nab-paclitaxel and bevacizumab. Toxicity, response, and association with VEGF polymorphism was analysed.ResultsThe study enrolled 110 patients who had undergone a median of 3 prior lines of therapy. The median age was 60 years (range, 17-85 years), and 55 patients (50%) had gemcitabine-refractory disease. We observed 3 dose-limiting toxicities during dose escalation and 3 DLTs in expansion cohorts. Dose escalation to 150 mg/m2 nab-paclitaxel and 15 mg/kg bevacizumab with 1000 mg/m2 of gemcitabine was well tolerated with no MTD. One patient with gemcitabine-refractory peritoneal papillary carcinoma had a complete response, 13 patients (13%) had partial responses, and 54 patients (52%) had stable disease ≥12 weeks. Exploratory VEGF single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) analysis was performed on 13 patients.ConclusionsThe combination of gemcitabine, nab-paclitaxel, and bevacizumab is safe, well-tolerated, and has activity in advanced malignancies, including gemcitabine-refractory tumours. Based on this study, the recommended phase 2 dose is gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2, nab-paclitaxel 125 mg/m2, and bevacizumab 15 mg/kg. VEGF polymorphism data should be evaluated in future bevacizumab-based trials.

Abstract Selinexor, an oral selective inhibitor of nuclear export (SINE), was demonstrated to hinder the DNA damage repair (DDR) system by reducing DDR proteins while enhancing the killing of cancer cells by DDR-based therapeutics in vivo studies. In this single-center, multi-arm phase 1b study, selinexor with carboplatin, doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (DC), irinotecan with fluorouracil and folinic acid (FOLFIRI), irinotecan, and capecitabine and oxaliplatin (XELOX), were employed as separate parallel arms. Eligible patients have relapsed/ metastatic refractory solid tumors following standard therapy or addition of selinexor to systemic therapy was appropriate. Nineteen patients were treated in the 5 arms. Tumor types included were colorectal (n = 3), breast (n = 3), neuroendocrine (n = 2), ovarian (n = 2), and pancreas cancers (n = 2). All patients developed one treatment-related adverse events (TRAE). The most prevalent TRAE were thrombocytopenia (84%), nausea (68%), leukopenia (68%), neutropenia (63%), and fatigue (58%). The common grade 3/4 TRAE were neutropenia (42%), leukopenia (26%), and hyponatremia (21%). Three patients had dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) in 3 separate arms. Fourteen patients were evaluable for response. Although no patients achieved complete or partial response (CR or PR), seven patients attained stable disease (SD). Disease control rate (DCR) was 14%. The combination of oral selinexor with different standard chemotherapies showed limited clinical activity despite toxicity and DLT prevented further dose escalation. Optimizing supportive care, the utility of growth factors, and aggressive measures on antiemetics strategies remain tangible. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02419495. Registered 14 April 2015, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02419495 ). Sponsor(s): Karyopharm Therapeutics