A Phase I Study of KIN-3248, an Irreversible Small-molecule Pan-FGFR Inhibitor, in Patients with Advanced FGFR2/3-driven Solid Tumors.

PURPOSE: Despite efficacy of approved FGFR inhibitors, emergence of polyclonal secondary mutations in the FGFR kinase domain leads to acquired resistance. KIN-3248 is a selective, irreversible, orally bioavailable, small-molecule inhibitor of FGFR1-4 that blocks both primary oncogenic and secondary kinase domain resistance FGFR alterations. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: A first-in-human, phase I study of KIN-3248 was conducted in patients with advanced solid tumors harboring FGFR2 and/or FGFR3 gene alterations (NCT05242822). The primary objective was determination of MTD/recommended phase II dose (RP2D). Secondary and exploratory objectives included antitumor activity, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and molecular response by circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) clearance. RESULTS: Fifty-four patients received doses ranging from 5 to 50 mg orally daily across six cohorts. Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (48.1%), gastric (9.3%), and urothelial (7.4%) were the most common tumors. Tumors harbored FGFR2 (68.5%) or FGFR3 (31.5%) alterations-23 (42.6%) received prior FGFR inhibitors. One dose-limiting toxicity (hypersensitivity) occurred in cohort 1 (5 mg). Treatment-related, adverse events included hyperphosphatemia, diarrhea, and stomatitis. The MTD/RP2D was not established. Exposure was dose proportional and concordant with hyperphosphatemia. Five partial responses were observed; 4 in FGFR inhibitor naïve and 1 in FGFR pretreated patients. Pretreatment ctDNA profiling confirmed FGFR2/3 alterations in 63.3% of cases and clearance at cycle 2 associated with radiographic response. CONCLUSION: The trial was terminated early for commercial considerations; therefore, RP2D was not established. Preliminary clinical data suggest that KIN-3248 is a safe, oral FGFR1-4 inhibitor with favorable pharmacokinetic parameters, though further dose escalation was required to nominate the MTD/RP2D. SIGNIFICANCE: KIN-3248 was a rationally designed, next generation selective FGFR inhibitor, that was effective in interfering with both FGFR wild-type and mutant signaling. Clinical data indicate that KIN-3248 is safe with a signal of antitumor activity. Translational science support the mechanism of action in that serum phosphate was proportional with exposure, paired biopsies suggested phospho-ERK inhibition (a downstream target of FGFR2/3), and ctDNA clearance may act as a RECIST response surrogate.

Clinical and Molecular Characterization of POLE Mutations as Predictive Biomarkers of Response to Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Advanced Cancers.

PURPOSE: DNA polymerase epsilon is critical to DNA proofreading and replication. Mutations in POLE have been associated with hypermutated tumors and antitumor response to immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy. We present a clinicopathologic analysis of patients with advanced cancers harboring POLE mutations, the pattern of co-occurring mutations, and their response to ICI therapy within the context of mutation pathogenicity. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of next-generation sequencing data at MD Anderson Cancer Center to identify patient tumors with POLE mutations and their co-occurring mutations. The pathogenicity of each mutation was annotated using InterVar and ClinVar. Differences in therapeutic response to ICI, survival, and co-occurring mutations were reported by POLE pathogenicity status. RESULTS: Four hundred fifty-eight patient tumors with POLE mutations were identified from 14,229 next-generation sequencing reports; 15.0% of POLE mutations were pathogenic, 15.9% benign, and 69.1% variant of unknown significance. Eighty-two patients received either programmed death 1 or programmed death ligand-1 inhibitors as monotherapy or in combination with cytotoxic T-cell lymphocyte-4 inhibitors. Patients with pathogenic POLE mutations had improved clinical benefit rate (82.4% v 30.0%; P = .013), median progression-free survival (15.1 v 2.2 months; P < .001), overall survival (29.5 v 6.8 months; P < .001), and longer treatment duration (median 15.5 v 2.5 months; P < .001) compared to those with benign variants. Progression-free survival and overall survival remained superior when adjusting for number of co-occurring mutations (≥ 10 v < 10) and/or microsatellite instability status (proficient mismatch repair v deficient mismatch repair). The number of comutations was not associated with response to ICI (clinical benefit v progressive disease: median 13 v 11 comutations; P = .18). CONCLUSION: Pathogenic POLE mutations were associated with clinical benefit to ICI therapy. Further studies are warranted to validate POLE mutation as a predictive biomarker of ICI therapy.

All bone metastases are not created equal: Revisiting treatment resistance in renal cell carcinoma.

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is the most common malignancy of the kidney, representing 80-90% of renal neoplasms, and is associated with a five-year overall survival rate of approximately 74%. The second most common site of metastasis is bone. As patients are living longer due to new RCC targeting agents and immunotherapy, RCC bone metastases (RCCBM) treatment failure is more prevalent. Bone metastasis formation in RCC is indicative of a more aggressive disease and worse prognosis. Osteolysis is a prominent feature and causes SRE, including pathologic fractures. Bone metastasis from other tumors such as lung, breast, and prostate cancer, are more effectively treated with bisphosphonates and denosumab, thereby decreasing the need for palliative surgical intervention. Resistance to these antiresportives in RCCBM reflects unique cellular and molecular mechanisms in the bone microenvironment that promote progression via inhibition of the anabolic reparative response. Identification of critical mechanisms underlying RCCBM induced anabolic impairment could provide needed insight into how to improve treatment outcomes for patients with RCCBM, with the goals of minimizing progression that necessitates palliative surgery and improving survival.

Combination antiangiogenic tyrosine kinase inhibition and anti-PD1 immunotherapy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: A retrospective analysis of safety, tolerance, and clinical outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: Two separate antiangiogenic tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and immunotherapy (IO) combinations are FDA-approved as front-line treatment for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Little is known about off-protocol and post-front-line experience with combination TKI-IO approaches. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of mRCC patients who received combination TKI-IO post-first-line therapy between November 2015 and January 2019 at MD Anderson Cancer Center and Duke Cancer Institute. Chart review detailed patient characteristics, treatments, toxicity, and survival. Independent radiologists, blinded to clinical data, assessed best radiographic response using RECIST v1.1. RESULTS: We identified 48 mRCC patients for inclusion: median age 65 years, 75.0% clear cell histology, 68.8% IMDC intermediate risk, and median two prior systemic therapies. TKI-IO combinations included nivolumab-cabozantinib (N +C; 24 patients), nivolumab-pazopanib (N+P; 13), nivolumab-axitinib (6), nivolumab-lenvatinib (2), and nivolumab-ipilimumab-cabozantinib (3). The median progression-free survival was 11.6 months and the median overall survival was not reached. Response data were available in 45 patients: complete response (CR; n = 3, 6.7%), partial response (PR; 20, 44.4%), stable disease (SD; 19, 42.2%), and progressive disease (3, 6.7%). Overall response rate was 51% and disease control rate (CR+PR+SD) was 93%. Only one patient had a grade ≥3 adverse event. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the first case series reporting off-label use of combination TKI-IO for mRCC. TKI-IO combinations, particularly N+P and N+C, are well tolerated and efficacious. Although further prospective research is essential, slow disease progression on IO or TKI monotherapy may be safely controlled with addition of either TKI or IO.

A provider's guide to primary myelofibrosis: pathophysiology, diagnosis, and management.

Although understanding of the pathogenesis and molecular biology of primary myelofibrosis continues to improve, treatment options are limited, and several biological features remain unexplained. With an appropriate clinical history, exam, laboratory evaluation, and bone marrow biopsy, the diagnosis can often be established. Recent studies have better characterized prognostic factors and driver mutations in myelofibrosis, facilitated by use of next-generation sequencing. These advances have facilitated development of a management strategy that is based on both risk factors and clinical phenotype. For low-risk patients, treatment will depend on symptom severity. For patients with higher-risk disease, several treatments are available including JAK inhibitors, allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant, and clinical trials using novel molecularly targeted therapies and rational drug combinations. In this review, we outline what is known about the disease pathogenesis, discuss an approach to reaching the diagnosis, review the prognosis of myelofibrosis, and detail current therapeutic strategies.

Differentiating skin-limited and multisystem Langerhans cell histiocytosis.

OBJECTIVE: To identify features associated with multisystem involvement and therapeutic failure in patients with skin Langerhans cell histiocytosis (LCH). STUDY DESIGN: We reviewed medical records of 71 consecutive patients with LCH with skin involvement evaluated at Texas Children's Hospital and analyzed clinical features, laboratory results, and the presence of circulating cells with the BRAF-V600E mutation with respect to initial staging and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Skin disease in patients older than 18 months of age at diagnosis was associated with the presence of multisystem disease (OR, 9.65; 95% CI, 1.17-79.4). Forty percent of patients referred for presumed skin-limited LCH had underlying multisystem involvement, one-half of these with risk-organ involvement. Patients with skin-limited LCH had a 3-year progression-free survival of 89% after initial therapy, and none developed multisystem disease. Patients with skin/multisystem involvement had a 3-year progression-free survival of 44% with vinblastine/prednisone therapy, and risk-organ involvement did not correlate with failure to achieve nonactive disease. Circulating cells with BRAF-V600E were detected at higher frequency in patients with multisystem involvement (8 of 11 skin/multisystem vs 1 of 13 skin-limited; P = .002). CONCLUSION: Skin-limited LCH necessitates infrequent therapeutic intervention and has a lower risk of progression relative to skin plus multisystem LCH. The less-aggressive clinical course and lack of circulating cells with the BRAF-V600E mutation in skin-limited LCH suggest a different mechanism of disease origin compared with multisystem or risk-organ disease.

Choosing treatment for stage I seminoma: who should get what?

We agree that physicians should choose active surveillance for their patients if they have the means to afford health insurance and are relatively stable within their careers. Prophylactic radiotherapy should be offered to patients who need a relaxed follow-up schedule for financial, emotional, or compliance reasons. For adjuvant carboplatin, longer follow-up data are needed to better define survival, long-term toxicities, frequency of second primary testicular cancers, quality of life, and cost to the healthcare system.