Search

01 april 2023, Item does not contain fulltext, BACKGROUND: Single-arm trials (SATs) can sometimes be used to support marketing authorization of anticancer medicinal products in the European Union. The level and durability of antitumor activity of the product as well as context are important aspects to determine the relevance of trial results. The aim of this study is to provide details on the contextualization of trial results and to evaluate the magnitude of benefit of medicinal products approved based on SATs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We focused on anticancer medicinal products for solid tumors approved on the basis of SAT results (2012-2021). Data were retrieved from European public assessment reports and/or published literature. The benefit of these medicinal products was evaluated via the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO)-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (MCBS). RESULTS: Eighteen medicinal products were approved based on 21 SATs-few medicinal products were supported by >1 SAT. For the majority of clinical trials, a clinically relevant treatment effect was (pre)specified (71.4%) and most often an accompanying sample size calculation was provided. For 10 studies, each testing a different medicinal product, a justification for the threshold for a clinically relevant treatment effect could be identified. At least 12 out of 18 applications included information to facilitate the contextualization of trial results, including six supportive studies. Of the pivotal SATs analyzed (n = 21), three were assigned an ESMO-MCBS score of 4, which corresponds to 'substantial' benefit. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical relevance of the treatment effects shown by medicinal products for solid tumors tested in SATs is dependent on the effect size and context. To better facilitate regulatory decision making, prespecifying and motivating a clinically relevant effect and aligning the sample size to that effect is important. External controls may facilitate in the contextualization process, but the associated limitations must be

Contains fulltext : 295941.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access), The Dutch Drug Rediscovery Protocol (DRUP) and the Australian Cancer Molecular Screening and Therapeutic (MoST) Program are similar nonrandomized, multidrug, pan-cancer trial platforms that aim to identify signals of clinical activity of molecularly matched targeted therapies or immunotherapies outside their approved indications. Here, we report results for advanced or metastatic cancer patients with tumors harboring cyclin D-CDK4/6 pathway alterations treated with CDK4/6 inhibitors palbociclib or ribociclib. We included adult patients that had therapy-refractory solid malignancies with the following alterations: amplifications of CDK4, CDK6, CCND1, CCND2 or CCND3, or complete loss of CDKN2A or SMARCA4. Within MoST, all patients were treated with palbociclib, whereas in DRUP, palbociclib and ribociclib were assigned to different cohorts (defined by tumor type and alteration). The primary endpoint for this combined analysis was clinical benefit, defined as confirmed objective response or stable disease ≥16 weeks. We treated 139 patients with a broad variety of tumor types; 116 with palbociclib and 23 with ribociclib. In 112 evaluable patients, the objective response rate was 0% and clinical benefit rate at 16 weeks was 15%. Median progression-free survival was 4 months (95% CI: 3-5 months), and median overall survival 5 months (95% CI: 4-6 months). In conclusion, only limited clinical activity of palbociclib and ribociclib monotherapy in patients with pretreated cancers harboring cyclin D-CDK4/6 pathway alterations was observed. Our findings indicate that monotherapy use of palbociclib or ribociclib is not recommended and that merging data of two similar precision oncology trials is feasible.

Contains fulltext : 247465.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access)

Item does not contain fulltext

Item does not contain fulltext

Contains fulltext : 252040.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access), INTRODUCTION: In 1-3% of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) human epidermal growth factor 2 (HER2) mutations are identified as a genomic driver. Nevertheless, no HER2-targeted treatment is approved for NSCLC. In the Drug Rediscovery Protocol (DRUP), patients are treated with off-label drugs based on their molecular profile. Here, we present the results of the cohort 'trastuzumab/pertuzumab for HER2 exon20 mutation positive (HER2m+) NSCLC'. METHODS: Patients with treatment refractory, advanced HER2m+ NSCLC with measurable disease (RECISTv1.1) were eligible. Treatment with intravenous trastuzumab combined with pertuzumab every 3 weeks was administered. The primary end-point was clinical benefit (CB: either objective response or stable disease ≥ 16 weeks). Patients were enrolled using a Simon-like 2-stage design, with 8 patients in stage 1 and up to 24 patients in stage 2 if at least 1 patient had CB in stage 1. At baseline, a biopsy for biomarker analysis, including whole genome sequencing, was obtained. RESULTS: Twenty-four evaluable patients were enrolled and treated between May 2017 and August 2020. CB was observed in 9 patients (38%); including an objective response rate of 8.3% (2 patients had a partial response) and 7 patients with stable disease ≥ 16 weeks. The most frequently observed HER2 mutation was p.Y772_A775dup (71%, n = 20). Median follow-up was 13 months, median progression-free survival and overall survival 4 (95% CI 3-6) and 10 months (95% CI 4 - not reached), respectively. Whole genome sequencing data (available for 67% of patients) confirmed the inclusion mutation in all cases. No unexpected toxicity was observed. CONCLUSION: Despite the fact that the study did meet its primary end-point, trastuzumab/pertuzumab was only marginally active in a subset of patients with heavily pre-treated HER2m+ NSCLC.

Contains fulltext : 241126.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access)

Contains fulltext : 238243.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access), Genomic profiling is critical for the identification of treatment options for patients with metastatic cancer, but it remains unclear how frequently this procedure should be repeated during the course of the disease. To address this, we analyzed whole-genome sequencing (WGS) data of 250 biopsy pairs, longitudinally collected over the treatment course of 231 adult patients with a representative variety of metastatic solid malignancies. Within the biopsy interval (median, 6.4 months), patients received one or multiple lines of (mostly) standard-of-care (SOC) treatments, with all major treatment modalities being broadly represented. SOC biomarkers and biomarkers for clinical trial enrollment could be identified in 23% and 72% of biopsies, respectively. For SOC genomic biomarkers, we observed full concordance between the first and the second biopsy in 99% of pairs. Of the 219 biomarkers for clinical trial enrollment that were identified in the first biopsies, we recovered 94% in the follow-up biopsies. Furthermore, a second WGS analysis did not identify additional biomarkers for clinical trial enrollment in 91% of patients. More-frequent genomic evolution was observed when considering specific genes targeted by small-molecule inhibitors or hormonal therapies (21% and 22% of cases, respectively). Together, our data demonstrate that there is limited evolution of the actionable genome of treated metastases. A single WGS analysis of a metastatic biopsy is generally sufficient to identify SOC genomic biomarkers and to identify investigational treatment opportunities.