A signal-seeking phase 2 study of Trastuzumab emtansine in tumours harbouring HER2 amplification or mutation.

This single-arm phase II non-randomised trial (ACTRN12619001265167) evaluated trastuzumab emtansine in solid cancers with HER2 amplification or mutation detected by comprehensive genomic profiling. The primary objective was objective response (OR), while secondary objectives included the time to progression (TTP) on study to TTP on prior therapy ratio, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). The cohort included 16 tumours with HER2 mutations (group 1) and 16 with HER2 amplification (group 2). After 17 months median follow-up, ORs occurred in 19% of group 1 (1 salivary gland carcinoma (SGC), 2 lung cancers) and 25% of group 2 (3 SGCs, 1 uterine carcinoma). Fourteen of 29 TTP-evaluable patients achieved a TTP ratio ≥1.3, including 10 without an OR. Median PFS and OS were 4.5 (95% CI 2.1-7.0) and 18.2 months (95% CI 8.1-not reached) respectively. Trastuzumab emtansine showed modest ORs and a favourable change in disease trajectory in select HER2-altered solid cancers.

Sequential [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 and docetaxel versus docetaxel in patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (UpFrontPSMA): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: Lutetium-177 [177Lu]Lu-prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-617 improves survival and quality of life in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, but whether it confers a benefit in hormone-sensitive disease is unknown. We aimed to evaluate [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 before docetaxel treatment in patients with de-novo high-volume metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. METHODS: UpFrontPSMA was an investigator-initiated, multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 2 trial done at 11 Australian hospitals. Eligible patients had prostate adenocarcinoma without clinically significant neuroendocrine differentiation or small-cell histology, were aged 18 years or older, had less than 4 weeks on androgen deprivation therapy, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, and had high-volume PSMA-avid disease on [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET-CT with no major discordance on 2-[18F] fluorodeoxyglucose-PET-CT. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to the experimental treatment ([177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 followed 6 weeks later by docetaxel) or standard-of-care treatment (docetaxel alone) using computer-based block randomisation with random block sizes, stratified by disease volume by conventional imaging and duration of androgen deprivation therapy at the time of registration. Neither patients nor investigators were masked to treatment assignment. Patients in the experimental group received two cycles of [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 7·5 GBq every 6 weeks intravenously, followed 6 weeks later by six cycles of docetaxel 75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks intravenously, whereas patients in the standard-of-care treatment group received six cycles of docetaxel 75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks intravenously. All patients received continuous androgen deprivation therapy. The primary endpoint was undetectable prostate-specific antigen (≤0·2 ng/mL) at 48 weeks, assessed using a modified intention-to-treat analysis. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04343885. FINDINGS: Between May 5, 2020, and April 18, 2023, 130 patients were randomly assigned, 63 (48%) to [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 plus docetaxel and 67 (52%) to docetaxel alone. All patients were male and no race or ethnicity data were collected. Median follow-up was 2·5 years (IQR 1·8-3·0). Four patients in the docetaxel alone group withdrew consent after randomisation and no data beyond screening were collected. An additional four patients were not evaluable for the primary endpoint at 48 weeks (two in each group). 25 (41%) of 61 patients (95% CI 30-54) in the [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 plus docetaxel group had undetectable PSA at 48 weeks compared with ten (16%) of 61 patients (9-28) in the docetaxel alone group (OR 3·88, 95% CI 1·61-9·38; p=0·0020). The most common grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events were febrile neutropenia (seven [11%] of 63 patients in the [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 plus docetaxel group vs six [10%] of 63 patients in the docetaxel alone group) and diarrhoea (four [6%] of 63 patients vs none). Serious adverse events occurred in 16 (25%) patients in the [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 plus docetaxel group (none were definitely related to [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617) and 16 (25%) patients in the docetaxel alone group. No treatment-related deaths occurred. INTERPRETATION: [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 followed by docetaxel improved antitumour activity in patients with de-novo high-volume metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer compared with docetaxel alone, without increased toxic effects. Our data potentially support a role for [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 in metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. FUNDING: Prostate Cancer Research Alliance (Movember Foundation and Australian Government Medical Research Future Fund), US Department of Defence Impact Award-Clinical Trials, Endocyte/Advanced Accelerator Applications (a Novartis company), Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organization, Victorian Cancer Agency, University of Melbourne, and Peter MacCallum Cancer Foundation.

Utility of 64Cu-Sarcophagine-Bombesin PET/CT in Men with Biochemically Recurrent Prostate Cancer and Negative or Equivocal Findings on 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT.

Despite a high detection rate of 68Ga-prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) PET/CT in biochemical recurrence (BCR) of prostate cancer, a significant proportion of men have negative 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT results. Gastrin-releasing peptide receptor, targeted by the copper-chelated bombesin analog 64Cu-sarcophagine-bombesin (SAR-BBN) PET/CT, is also overexpressed in prostate cancer. In this prospective imaging study, we investigate the detection rate of 64Cu-SAR-BBN PET/CT in patients with BCR and negative or equivocal 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT results. Methods: Men with confirmed adenocarcinoma of the prostate, prior definitive therapy, and BCR (defined as a prostate-specific antigen [PSA] level > 0.2 ng/mL) with negative or equivocal 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT results within 3 mo were eligible for enrollment. 64Cu-SAR-BBN PET/CT scans were acquired at 1 and 3 h after administration of 200 MBq of 64Cu-SAR-BBN, with further delayed imaging undertaken optionally at 24 h. PSA (ng/mL) was determined at baseline. All PET (PSMA and bombesin) scans were assessed visually. Images were read with masking of the clinical results by 2 experienced nuclear medicine specialists, with a third reader in cases of discordance. Accuracy was defined using a standard of truth that included biopsy confirmation, confirmatory imaging, or response to targeted treatment. Results: Twenty-five patients were enrolled. Prior definitive therapy was radical prostatectomy (n = 24, 96%) or radiotherapy (n = 1, 4%). The median time since definitive therapy was 7 y (interquartile range [IQR], 4-11 y), and the Gleason score was 7 or less (n = 15, 60%), 8 (n = 3, 12%), or 9 (n = 7, 28%). The median PSA was 0.69 ng/mL (IQR, 0.28-2.45 ng/mL). Baseline PSMA PET scans were negative in 19 patients (76%) and equivocal in 6 (24%). 64Cu-SAR-BBN PET-avid disease was identified in 44% (11/25): 12% (3/25) with local recurrence, 20% (5/25) with pelvic node metastases, and 12% (3/25) with distant metastases. The κ-score between readers was 0.49 (95% CI, 0.16-0.82). Patients were followed up for a median of 10 mo (IQR, 9-12 mo). Bombesin PET/CT results were true-positive in 5 of 25 patients (20%), false-positive in 2 of 25 (8%), false-negative in 7 of 25 (28%), and unverified in 11 of 25 (44%). Conclusion: 64Cu-SAR-BBN PET/CT demonstrated sites of disease recurrence in 44% of BCR cases with negative or equivocal 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT results. Further evaluation to confirm diagnostic benefit is warranted.

Pembrolizumab plus Abiraterone Acetate and Prednisone in Patients with Chemotherapy-naïve Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer: Results from KEYNOTE-365 Cohort D.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Abiraterone acetate (abiraterone) plus prednisone is approved for the treatment of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Our aim was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab plus abiraterone in mCRPC. METHODS: In cohort D of the phase 1b/2 KEYNOTE-365 study (NCT02861573), patients were chemotherapy-naïve, had disease progression ≤6 mo before screening, and had either not received prior next-generation hormonal agents for mCRPC or had received prior enzalutamide for mCRPC and had disease progression or became intolerant to enzalutamide. Patients received pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every 3 wk plus abiraterone 1000 mg orally once daily and prednisone 5 mg orally twice daily. The primary endpoints were safety, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response rate, and objective response rate (ORR) according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 (RECIST v1.1) by blinded independent central review (BICR). Secondary endpoints included radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) according to Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group 3-modified RECIST v1.1 by BICR and overall survival (OS). KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: For the 103 patients who were treated, median follow-up was 28 mo (interquartile range 26-31). The confirmed PSA response rate was 56% (58/103 patients). The ORR for patients with RECIST v1.1-measurable disease was 16% (6/37 patients). Median rPFS was 15 mo (95% confidence interval 9.2-22) and median OS was 30 mo (95% confidence interval 23-not reached); the estimated 24-mo OS rate was 58%. In total, 91% of patients experienced treatment-related adverse events, and 39% experienced grade 3-5 events. Grade 3/4 elevation of alanine aminotransferase (ALT) or aspartate aminotransferase (AST) was observed in 12% and 6.8% of patients, respectively. One patient died due to treatment-related myasthenic syndrome. Study limitations include the single-arm design. CONCLUSIONS: Pembrolizumab plus abiraterone and prednisone demonstrated antitumor activity and acceptable safety in patients with chemotherapy-naïve mCRPC. Higher incidence of grade 3/4 elevated ALT/AST occurred than was reported for the individual agents. PATIENT SUMMARY: For patients with metastatic castratation-resistant prostate cancer, the drug combination of pembrolizumab plus abiraterone and prednisone showed antitumor activity and acceptable safety.

First-line Avelumab plus Chemotherapy in Patients with Advanced Solid Tumors: Results from the Phase Ib/II JAVELIN Chemotherapy Medley Study.

PURPOSE: Chemotherapy can potentially enhance the activity of immune checkpoint inhibitors by promoting immune priming. The phase Ib/II JAVELIN Chemotherapy Medley trial (NCT03317496) evaluated first-line avelumab + concurrent chemotherapy in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma or non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Avelumab 800 or 1,200 mg was administered continuously every 3 weeks with standard doses of cisplatin + gemcitabine in patients with urothelial carcinoma, or carboplatin + pemetrexed in patients with nonsquamous NSCLC. Dual primary endpoints were dose-limiting toxicity (DLT; phase Ib) and confirmed objective response (phase Ib/II). RESULTS: In phase Ib, urothelial carcinoma and NSCLC cohorts received avelumab 800 mg (n = 13 and n = 6, respectively) or 1,200 mg (n = 6 each) + chemotherapy. In evaluable patients with urothelial carcinoma treated with avelumab 800 or 1,200 mg + chemotherapy, DLT occurred in 1/12 (8.3%) and 1/6 (16.7%), respectively; no DLT occurred in the NSCLC cohort. In phase II, 35 additional patients with urothelial carcinoma received avelumab 1,200 mg + chemotherapy. Across all treated patients, safety profiles were similar irrespective of avelumab dose. Objective response rates (95% confidence internal) with avelumab 800 or 1,200 mg + chemotherapy, respectively, across phase Ib/II, were 53.8% (25.1-80.8) and 39.0% (24.2-55.5) in urothelial carcinoma, and 50.0% (11.8-88.2) and 33.3% (4.3-77.7) in NSCLC. CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary efficacy and safety findings with avelumab + chemotherapy in urothelial carcinoma and NSCLC were consistent with previous studies of similar combination regimens. Conclusions about clinical activity are limited by small patient numbers. SIGNIFICANCE: This phase Ib/II trial evaluated avelumab (immune checkpoint inhibitor) administered concurrently with standard first-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma or advanced nonsquamous NSCLC without actionable mutations. Efficacy and safety appeared consistent with previous studies of similar combinations, although patient numbers were small.

[177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 plus enzalutamide in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (ENZA-p): an open-label, multicentre, randomised, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Enzalutamide and lutetium-177 [177Lu]Lu-prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-617 both improve overall survival in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Androgen and PSMA receptors have a close intracellular relationship, with data suggesting complementary benefit if targeted concurrently. In this study, we assessed the activity and safety of enzalutamide plus adaptive-dosed [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 versus enzalutamide alone as first-line treatment for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. METHODS: ENZA-p was an open-label, randomised, controlled phase 2 trial done at 15 hospitals in Australia. Participants were men aged 18 years or older with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer not previously treated with docetaxel or androgen receptor pathway inhibitors for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, gallium-68 [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-PET-CT (PSMA-PET-CT) positive disease, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, and at least two risk factors for early progression on enzalutamide. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) by a centralised, web-based system using minimisation with a random component to stratify for study site, disease burden, use of early docetaxel, and previous treatment with abiraterone acetate. Patients were either given oral enzalutamide 160 mg daily alone or with adaptive-dosed (two or four doses) intravenous 7·5 GBq [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 every 6-8 weeks dependent on an interim PSMA-PET-CT (week 12). The primary endpoint was prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression-free survival, defined as the interval from the date of randomisation to the date of first evidence of PSA progression, commencement of non-protocol anticancer therapy, or death. The analysis was done in the intention-to-treat population, using stratified Cox proportional hazards regression. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04419402, and participant follow-up is ongoing. FINDINGS: 162 participants were randomly assigned between Aug 17, 2020, and July 26, 2022. 83 men were assigned to the enzalutamide plus [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 group, and 79 were assigned to the enzalutamide group. Median follow-up in this interim analysis was 20 months (IQR 18-21), with 32 (39%) of 83 patients in the enzalutamide plus [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 group and 16 (20%) of 79 patients in the enzalutamide group remaining on treatment at the data cutoff date. Median age was 71 years (IQR 64-76). Median PSA progression-free survival was 13·0 months (95% CI 11·0-17·0) in the enzalutamide plus [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 group and 7·8 months (95% CI 4·3-11·0) in the enzalutamide group (hazard ratio 0·43, 95% CI 0·29-0·63, p<0·0001). The most common adverse events (all grades) were fatigue (61 [75%] of 81 patients), nausea (38 [47%]), and dry mouth (32 [40%]) in the enzalutamide plus [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 group and fatigue (55 [70%] of 79), nausea (21 [27%]), and constipation (18 [23%]) in the enzalutamide group. Grade 3-5 adverse events occurred in 32 (40%) of 81 patients in the enzalutamide plus [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 group and 32 (41%) of 79 patients in the enzalutamide group. Grade 3 events that occurred only in the enzalutamide plus [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 group included anaemia (three [4%] of 81 participants) and decreased platelet count (one [1%] participant). No grade 4 or 5 events were attributed to treatment on central review in either group. INTERPRETATION: The addition of [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 to enzalutamide improved PSA progression-free survival providing evidence of enhanced anticancer activity in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer with risk factors for early progression on enzalutamide and warrants further evaluation of the combination more broadly in metastatic prostate cancer. FUNDING: Prostate Cancer Research Alliance (Movember and Australian Federal Government), St Vincent's Clinic Foundation, GenesisCare, Roy Morgan Research, and Endocyte (a Novartis company).

What matters most to people with metastatic uveal melanoma? A qualitative study to inform future measurement of health-related quality of life.

Metastatic uveal melanoma (mUM) is a rare cancer with poor prognosis, but novel treatments are emerging. Currently, there are no mUM-specific health-related quality of life (HRQL) questionnaires available for clinical research. We aimed to explore how mUM and its treatment affect HRQL and assess the content validity of existing questionnaires. Participants were patients with mUM and healthcare professionals involved in their care. Qualitative data were collected using semi-structured interviews and focus groups. Data collection and analysis used an integrative approach involving inductive questions/coding to elicit new concepts and deductive questions/coding based on domains of existing HRQL questionnaires. Initial interviews/focus groups focussed on HRQL questionnaires designed for patients with uveal melanoma or liver metastases. As new concepts were elicited, domains and items from other questionnaires were subsequently added. Seventeen patients and 16 clinicians participated. HRQL concerns assessed by uveal melanoma-specific questionnaires were largely resolved by the time of metastasis. The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Immunotherapy Module (FACT-ICM) adequately captured most immunotherapy-related side effects during initial treatment cycles. However, most patients emphasised emotional impacts over physical ones, focussing on the existential threat posed by disease amidst uncertainty about treatment accessibility and effectiveness. Patients were also concerned with treatment burden, including time commitment, travel, need for hospitalisation, and expenses. The relative importance of HRQL issues varied over time and across treatment modalities, with no single questionnaire being sufficient. Pending further development and psychometric testing, clinical researchers may need to take a modular approach to measuring the HRQL impacts of mUM.

Targeted therapy, immunotherapy, and small molecules and peptidomimetics as emerging immunoregulatory agents for melanoma.

Primary cutaneous melanoma is the most lethal of all skin neoplasms and its incidence is increasing. Clinical management of advanced melanoma in the last decade has been revolutionised by the availability of immunotherapies and targeted therapies, used alone and in combination. This article summarizes advances in the treatment of late-stage melanoma including use of protein kinase inhibitors, antibody-based immune checkpoint inhibitors, adoptive immunotherapy, vaccines and more recently, small molecules and peptidomimetics as emerging immunoregulatory agents.

Globe Salvage and Vision Preservation by Neoadjuvant Darovasertib and Crizotinib in Uveal Melanoma.

PURPOSE: To report the effective use of neoadjuvant darovasertib and crizotinib in a patient with a large uveal melanoma (UM) in his only functional eye. DESIGN: Case report. SUBJECTS: One patient with T4b UM. INTERVENTION: Neoadjuvant darovasertib and crizotinib, followed by plaque brachytherapy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Objective tumor response and conversion from planned enucleation to placement of fovea- and optic nerve-sparing plaque brachytherapy. RESULTS: A patient with a history of left eye blindness from retinal artery occlusion presented with rapidly declining right eye vision due to a primary UM measuring 18 mm in maximal diameter and 16.5 mm in maximal thickness. To salvage vision, neoadjuvant treatment was initiated using darovasertib and crizotinib. After 6 months of neoadjuvant treatment, which included intraocular lens replacement for tumor-associated cataract, the tumor regressed to 14.1 mm in maximal diameter and 2.6 mm in maximal thickness, enabling treatment with plaque brachytherapy rather than enucleation. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of darovasertib and crizotinib for UM is an effective neoadjuvant strategy that warrants further investigation as an approach to improve visual outcomes from the treatment of primary UM. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE: The other authors have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article.

Overall survival with [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 versus cabazitaxel in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (TheraP): secondary outcomes of a randomised, open-label, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: The TheraP study reported improved prostate-specific antigen responses with lutetium-177 [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 versus cabazitaxel in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer progressing after docetaxel. In this Article, we report the secondary outcome of overall survival with mature follow-up, and an updated imaging biomarker analysis. We also report the outcomes of participants excluded due to ineligibility on gallium-68 [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 and 2-[18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (2-[18F]FDG) PET-CT. METHODS: TheraP was an open-label, randomised phase 2 trial at 11 centres in Australia. Eligible participants had metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer progressing after docetaxel, and PET imaging with [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 and 2-[18F]FDG that showed prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-positive disease and no sites of metastatic disease with discordant 2-[18F]FDG-positive and PSMA-negative findings. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to treatment with [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 (every 6 weeks for a maximum of six cycles; starting at 8·5 GBq, decreasing by 0.5 GBq to 6·0 GBq for the sixth cycle) versus cabazitaxel (20 mg/m2 every 3 weeks, maximum of ten cycles). Overall survival was analysed by intention-to-treat and summarised as restricted mean survival time (RMST) to account for non-proportional hazards, with a 36-month restriction time corresponding to median follow-up. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03392428, and is complete. FINDINGS: 291 men were registered from Feb 6, 2018, to Sept 3, 2019; after study imaging, 200 were eligible and randomly assigned to treatment with [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 (n=99) or cabazitaxel (n=101). After completing study treatment, 20 (20%) participants assigned to cabazitaxel and 32 (32%) assigned to [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 were subsequently treated with the alternative regimen. After a median follow-up of 35·7 months (IQR 31·1 to 39·2), 77 (78%) participants had died in the [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 group and 70 (69%) participants had died in the cabazitaxel group. Overall survival was similar among those assigned to [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 versus those assigned to cabazitaxel (RMST 19·1 months [95% CI 16·9 to 21·4] vs 19·6 months [17·4 to 21·8]; difference -0·5 months [95% CI -3·7 to 2·7]; p=0·77). No additional safety signals were identified with the longer follow-up in this analysis. 80 (27%) of 291 men who were registered after initial eligibility screening were excluded after [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 and 2-[18F]FDG PET. In the 61 of these men with follow-up available, RMST was 11·0 months (95% CI 9·0 to 13·1). INTERPRETATION: These results support the use of [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 as an alternative to cabazitaxel for PSMA-positive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer progressing after docetaxel. We did not find evidence that overall survival differed between the randomised groups. Median overall survival was shorter for men who were excluded because of low PSMA expression or 2-[18F]FDG-discordant disease. FUNDING: Australian and New Zealand Urogenital and Prostate Cancer Trials Group, Prostate Cancer Foundation of Australia, Endocyte (a Novartis company), Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organization, Movember, It's a Bloke Thing, CAN4CANCER, and The Distinguished Gentleman's Ride.

Circulating Tumour DNA Biomarkers Associated with Outcomes in Metastatic Prostate Cancer Treated with Lutetium-177-PSMA-617.

Background: Lutetium-177-prostate-specific membrane antigen- 617 (Lu-PSMA) is an effective therapy for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). However, treatment responses are heterogeneous despite stringent positron emission tomography (PET)-based imaging selection criteria. Molecularly based biomarkers have potential to refine patient selection and optimise outcomes. Objective: To identify circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) features associated with treatment outcomes for men treated with Lu-PSMA. Design setting and participants: ctDNA from men treated with Lu-PSMA in combination with idronoxil for progressive mCRPC were analysed using an 85-gene customised sequencing assay. ctDNA fractions, molecular profiles, and the presence of alterations in aggressive-variant prostate cancer (AVPC) genes were analysed at baseline, cycle 3 and at disease progression. Intervention: Men received Lu-PSMA with idronoxil every 6 wk for up to six cycles. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Baseline and exit PSMA and fluorodeoxyglucose PET/computed tomography (CT) imaging was conducted at baseline and study exit. Single-photon emission CT (SPECT) scans were performed 24 h after Lu-PSMA. Blood samples were collected at baseline,cycle 3 and at disease progression. Cox proportional-hazards models were used to assess associations and derive hazard ratios (HRs) and confidence intervals (CIs) for associations between molecular factors, imaging features, and clinical outcomes. Results and limitations: Sixty samples from 32 men were sequenced (32 at baseline, 24 at cycle 3, four from patients with disease progression); two samples (baseline, on-treatment) from one individual were excluded from analysis owing to poor quality of the baseline sequencing data. Alterations in AVPC genes were associated with shorter prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in univariate (HR 3.4, 95% CI 1.5-7.7; p = 0.0036; and HR 3.3, 95% CI 1.4-7.7; p = 0.0063, respectively) and multivariate analyses (HR 4.8, 95% CI 1.8-13; p = 0.0014; and HR 4.1, 95% CI 1.6-11; p = 0.004). Conclusions: ctDNA alterations in AVPC genes were associated with shorter PSA PFS and OS among men treated with Lu-PSMA and intermittent idronoxil. These candidate molecular biomarkers warrant further study to determine whether they have predictive value and potential to guide synergistic combination strategies to enhance outcomes for men treated with Lu-PSMA for mCRPC. Patient summary: Certain DNA/gene changes detected in the blood of men with advanced prostate cancer were associated with shorter benefit from lutetium PSMA, a targeted radioactive therapy. This information may be useful in determining which men may benefit most from this treatment, but additional research is needed.

Three-Year Overall Survival with Tebentafusp in Metastatic Uveal Melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Tebentafusp, a T-cell receptor-bispecific molecule that targets glycoprotein 100 and CD3, is approved for adult patients who are positive for HLA-A*02:01 and have unresectable or metastatic uveal melanoma. The primary analysis in the present phase 3 trial supported a long-term survival benefit associated with the drug. METHODS: We report the 3-year efficacy and safety results from our open-label, phase 3 trial in which HLA-A*02:01-positive patients with previously untreated metastatic uveal melanoma were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive tebentafusp (tebentafusp group) or the investigator's choice of therapy with pembrolizumab, ipilimumab, or dacarbazine (control group), with randomization stratified according to the lactate dehydrogenase level. The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS: At a minimum follow-up of 36 months, median overall survival was 21.6 months in the tebentafusp group and 16.9 months in the control group (hazard ratio for death, 0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.54 to 0.87). The estimated percentage of patients surviving at 3 years was 27% in the tebentafusp group and 18% in the control group. The most common treatment-related adverse events of any grade in the tebentafusp group were rash (83%), pyrexia (76%), pruritus (70%), and hypotension (38%). Most tebentafusp-related adverse events occurred early during treatment, and no new adverse events were observed with long-term administration. The percentage of patients who discontinued treatment because of adverse events continued to be low in both treatment groups (2% in the tebentafusp group and 5% in the control group). No treatment-related deaths occurred. CONCLUSIONS: This 3-year analysis supported a continued long-term benefit of tebentafusp for overall survival among adult HLA-A*02:01-positive patients with previously untreated metastatic uveal melanoma. (Funded by Immunocore; IMCgp100-202 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03070392; EudraCT number, 2015-003153-18.).

Health-related quality of life in GALAHAD: A multicenter, open-label, phase 2 study of niraparib for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer and DNA-repair gene defects.

BACKGROUND: Niraparib is a highly selective poly (adenosine diphosphateribose) polymerase-1 and poly (adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase-2 inhibitor indicated for select patients with ovarian, fallopian tube, and primary peritoneal cancer. The phase 2 GALAHAD trial (NCT02854436) demonstrated that niraparib monotherapy is tolerable and efficacious in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and homologous recombination repair (HRR) gene alterations, particularly those with breast cancer gene (BRCA) alterations who had progressed on prior androgen signaling inhibitor therapy and taxane-based chemotherapy. OBJECTIVE: To report the prespecified patient-reported outcomes analysis from GALAHAD. METHODS: Eligible patients with alterations to BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 (BRCA cohort) and with pathogenic alterations in other HRR genes (other HRR cohort) were enrolled and received niraparib 300 mg once daily. Patient-reported outcome instruments included the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate and the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form. Changes from baseline were compared using a mixed-effect model for repeated measures. RESULTS: On average, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) improved in the BRCA cohort by cycle 3 (mean change = 6.03; 95% CI = 2.76-9.29) and was maintained above baseline until cycle 10 (mean change = 2.84; 95% CI = -1.95 to 7.63), whereas the other HRR cohort showed no early change in HRQoL from baseline (mean change = -0.07; 95% CI = -4.69 to 4.55) and declined by cycle 10 (mean change = -5.10; 95% CI = -15.3 to 5.06). Median time to deterioration in pain intensity and pain interference could not be estimated in either cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with advanced mCRPC and BRCA alterations treated with niraparib experienced more meaningful improvement in overall HRQoL, pain intensity, and pain interference compared with those with other HRR alterations. In this population of castrate, heavily pretreated patients with mCRPC and HRR alterations, stabilization, and improvement in HRQoL may be relevant to consider when making treatment decisions. DISCLOSURES: This work was supported by Janssen Research & Development, LLC (no grant number). Dr Smith has received grants and personal fees from Bayer, Amgen, Janssen, and Lilly; and has received personal fees from Astellas Pharma, Novartis, and Pfizer. Dr Sandhu has received grants from Amgen, Endocyte, and Genentech; has received grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca and Merck; and has received personal fees from Bristol Myers Squibb and Merck Serono. Dr George has received personal fees from the American Association for Cancer Research, Axess Oncology, Capio Biosciences, Constellation Pharma, EMD Serono, Flatiron, Ipsen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Michael J. Hennessey Association, Millennium Medical Publishing, Modra Pharma, Myovant Sciences, Inc., NCI Genitourinary, Nektar Therapeutics, Physician Education Resource, Propella TX, RevHealth, LLC, and UroGPO; has received grants and personal fees from Astellas Pharma, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Pfizer; has received personal fees and nonfinancial support from Bayer and UroToday; has received grants from Calithera and Novartis; and has received grants, personal fees, and nonfinancial support from Exelixis, Inc., Sanofi, and Janssen Pharma. Dr Chi has received grants from Janssen during the conduct of the study; has received grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Astellas Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, POINT Biopharma, Roche, and Sanofi; and has received personal fees from Daiichi Sankyo, Merck, and Bristol Myers Squibb. Dr Saad has received grants, personal fees, and nonfinancial support from Janssen during the conduct of the study; and has received grants, personal fees, and nonfinancial support from AstraZeneca, Astellas Pharma, Pfizer, Bayer, Myovant, Sanofi, and Novartis. Dr Thiery-Vuillemin has received grants, personal fees, and nonfinancial support from Pfizer; has received personal fees and nonfinancial support from AstraZeneca, Janssen, Ipsen, Roche/Genentech, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Astellas Pharma; and has received personal fees from Sanofi, Novartis, and Bristol Myers Squibb. Dr Olmos has received grants, personal fees, and nonfinancial support from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Janssen, and Pfizer; has received personal fees from Clovis, Daiichi Sankyo, and Merck Sharp & Dohme; and has received nonfinancial support from Astellas Pharma, F. Hoffman-LaRoche, Genentech, and Ipsen. Dr Danila has received research support from the US Department of Defense, the American Society of Clinical Oncology, the Prostate Cancer Foundation, Stand Up to Cancer, Janssen Research & Development, Astellas Pharma, Medivation, Agensys, Genentech, and CreaTV. Dr Gafanov has received grants from Janssen during the conduct of the study. Dr Castro has received grants from Janssen during the conduct of the study; has received grants and personal fees from Janssen, Bayer, AstraZeneca, and Pfizer; and has received personal fees from Astellas Pharma, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Roche, and Clovis. Dr Moon has received research funding from SeaGen, HuyaBio, Janssen, BMS, Aveo, Xencor, and has received personal fees from Axess Oncology, MJH, EMD Serono, and Pfizer. Dr Joshua has received nonfinancial support from Janssen; consulted or served in an advisory role for Neoleukin, Janssen Oncology, Ipsen, AstraZeneca, Sanofi, Noxopharm, IQvia, Pfizer, Novartis, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck Serono, and Eisai; and received research funding from Bristol Myers Squibb, Janssen Oncology, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Mayne Pharma, Roche/Genentech, Bayer, MacroGenics, Lilly, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, and Corvus Pharmaceuticals. Drs Mason, Liu, Bevans, Lopez-Gitlitz, and Francis and Mr Espina are employees of Janssen Research & Development. Dr Mason owns stocks with Janssen. Dr Fizazi has participated in advisory boards and talks for Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Clovis, Daiichi Sankyo, Janssen, MSD, Novartis/AAA, Pfizer, and Sanofi, with honoraria to his institution (Institut Gustave Roussy); has participated in advisory boards for, with personal honoraria from, Arvinas, CureVac, MacroGenics, and Orion. Study registration number: NCT02854436.

Neoadjuvant Cabazitaxel plus Abiraterone/Leuprolide Acetate in Patients with High-Risk Prostate Cancer: ACDC-RP Phase II Trial.

PURPOSE: Early treatment intensification with neoadjuvant therapy may improve outcomes in patients with high-risk, localized prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy. Our objective was to compare pathologic, oncologic, and safety outcomes of neoadjuvant abiraterone acetate plus leuprolide acetate with or without cabazitaxel prior to radical prostatectomy in patients with localized, high-risk prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This open-label, multicenter, phase II trial randomized men with clinically localized, D'Amico high-risk prostate cancer to neoadjuvant abiraterone acetate (1,000 mg/day) and leuprolide acetate (22.5 mg every 3 months) with or without cabazitaxel (25 mg/m2) prior to radical prostatectomy. The primary outcome was pathologic complete response (pCR) or minimal residual disease (MRD). Secondary outcomes included surgical margins, lymph node involvement, pathologic stage, 12-month biochemical relapse-free survival (BRFS) rates, and safety profile. RESULTS: The per-protocol population consisted of 70 patients [cabazitaxel arm (Arm A): 37, no cabazitaxel arm (Arm B): 33]. Median patient age and prostate-specific antigen levels were 63.5 years [interquartile range (IQR), 58.0-68.0] and 21.9 ng/mL (IQR, 14.6-42.8), respectively. pCR/MRD occurred in 16 (43.2%) versus 15 patients (45.5%) in arms A and B, respectively (P = 0.85). pCR occurred in two (5.4%) versus three patients (9.1%) in arms A and B, respectively (P = 0.66). Patients with ≤ 25% total biopsy cores positive had increased odds of pCR/MRD (P = 0.04). Patients with pCR/MRD had superior 12-month BRFS rates (96.0% vs. 62.0%, P = 0.03). Grade 3+ adverse events occurred in 42.5% and 23.7% of patients in arms A and B, respectively (P = 0.078). CONCLUSIONS: Neoadjuvant cabazitaxel addition to abiraterone acetate/leuprolide acetate prior to radical prostatectomy did not improve pCR/MRD in clinically localized, high-risk prostate cancer.

A signal-seeking Phase 2 study of olaparib and durvalumab in advanced solid cancers with homologous recombination repair gene alterations.

PURPOSE: To determine the safety and efficacy of PARP plus PD-L1 inhibition (olaparib + durvalumab, O + D) in patients with advanced solid, predominantly rare cancers harbouring homologous recombination repair (HRR) defects. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In total, 48 patients were treated with O + D, 16 with BRCA1/2 alterations (group 1) and 32 with other select HRR alterations (group 2). Overall, 32 (66%) patients had rare or less common cancers. The primary objective of this single-arm Phase II trial was a progression-free survival rate at 6 months (PFS6). Post hoc exploratory analyses were conducted on archival tumour tissue and serial bloods. RESULTS: The PFS6 rate was 35% and 38% with durable objective tumour responses (OTR) in 3(19%) and 3(9%) in groups 1 and 2, respectively. Rare cancers achieving an OTR included cholangiocarcinoma, perivascular epithelioid cell (PEComa), neuroendocrine, gallbladder and endometrial cancer. O + D was safe, with five serious adverse events related to the study drug(s) in 3 (6%) patients. A higher proportion of CD38 high B cells in the blood and higher CD40 expression in tumour was prognostic of survival. CONCLUSIONS: O + D demonstrated no new toxicity concerns and yielded a clinically meaningful PFS6 rate and durable OTRs across several cancers with HRR defects, including rare cancers.

A Phase Ib, Open-label Study Evaluating the Safety and Efficacy of Ipatasertib plus Rucaparib in Patients with Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: To report the safety and efficacy of ipatasertib (AKT inhibitor) combined with rucaparib (PARP inhibitor) in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) previously treated with second-generation androgen receptor inhibitors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this two-part phase Ib trial (NCT03840200), patients with advanced prostate, breast, or ovarian cancer received ipatasertib (300 or 400 mg daily) plus rucaparib (400 or 600 mg twice daily) to assess safety and identify a recommended phase II dose (RP2D). A part 1 dose-escalation phase was followed by a part 2 dose-expansion phase in which only patients with mCRPC received the RP2D. The primary efficacy endpoint was prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response (≥50% reduction) in patients with mCRPC. Patients were not selected on the basis of tumor mutational status. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients were enrolled (part 1 = 21; part 2 = 30). Ipatasertib 400 mg daily plus rucaparib 400 mg twice daily was the selected RP2D, received by 37 patients with mCRPC. Grade 3/4 adverse events occurred in 46% (17/37) of patients, with one grade 4 adverse event (anemia, deemed related to rucaparib) and no deaths. Adverse events leading to treatment modification occurred in 70% (26/37). The PSA response rate was 26% (9/35), and the objective response rate per Response Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.1 was 10% (2/21). Median radiographic progression-free survival per Prostate Cancer Working Group 3 criteria was 5.8 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 4.0-8.1], and median overall survival was 13.3 months (95% CI, 10.9-not evaluable). CONCLUSIONS: Ipatasertib plus rucaparib was manageable with dose modification but did not demonstrate synergistic or additive antitumor activity in previously treated patients with mCRPC.

Monitoring AKT activity and targeting in live tissue and disease contexts using a real-time Akt-FRET biosensor mouse.

Aberrant AKT activation occurs in a number of cancers, metabolic syndrome, and immune disorders, making it an important target for the treatment of many diseases. To monitor spatial and temporal AKT activity in a live setting, we generated an Akt-FRET biosensor mouse that allows longitudinal assessment of AKT activity using intravital imaging in conjunction with image stabilization and optical window technology. We demonstrate the sensitivity of the Akt-FRET biosensor mouse using various cancer models and verify its suitability to monitor response to drug targeting in spheroid and organotypic models. We also show that the dynamics of AKT activation can be monitored in real time in diverse tissues, including in individual islets of the pancreas, in the brown and white adipose tissue, and in the skeletal muscle. Thus, the Akt-FRET biosensor mouse provides an important tool to study AKT dynamics in live tissue contexts and has broad preclinical applications.

Efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibition in metastatic uveal melanoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Metastatic uveal melanoma (mUM) has historically been associated with short survival and limited effective treatments. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have been trialed in mUM; however, robust conclusions regarding their efficacy are difficult to draw given small study sizes and heterogeneous patient populations. Five databases were searched using a combination of 'ICI' and 'mUM' headings, and data on patient demographics, objective response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were extracted. Pooled ORR was calculated using a random effects model and the inverse variance method. Available Kaplan-Meier OS and PFS curves were used to construct summary OS and PFS plots, from which median values were derived. Pooled ORR was 9.2% overall (95% CI 7.2-11.8) [4.1% for anti-CTLA4 (95% CI 2.1-7.7), 7.1% for anti-PD(L)1 (95% CI 4.5-10.9) and 13.5% for anti-CTLA4 plus anti-PD1 (95% CI 10.0-18.0)]. Median OS was 11.5 months overall (95% CI 9.5-13.8) [8.0 months for anti-CTLA4 (95% CI 5.5-9.9), 11.7 months for anti-PD(L)1 (95% CI 9.0-14.0) and 16.0 months for ipilimumab plus anti-PD1 (95% CI 11.5-17.7) ( P < 0.001)]. Median PFS was 3.0 months overall (95% CI 2.9-3.1). ICIs have limited efficacy in mUM and a recommendation for their use must consider the balance of benefit and risk for individual patients if no other options are available. Further biomarker profiling studies may be helpful in assessing which patients will benefit from ICIs, in particular the addition of ipilimumab to anti-PD1 therapy.

Chemotherapy in Cutaneous Melanoma: Is There Still a Role?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: In the preceding decade, the management of metastatic cutaneous melanoma has been revolutionised with the development of highly effective therapies including immune checkpoint inhibitors (specifically CTLA-4 and PD-1 inhibitors) and targeted therapies (BRAF and MEK inhibitors). The role of chemotherapy in the contemporary management of melanoma is undefined. RECENT FINDINGS: Extended analyses highlight substantially improved 5-year survival rates of approximately 50% in patients with metastatic melanoma treated with first-line therapies. However, most patients will progress on these first-line treatments. Sequencing of chemotherapy following failure of targeted and immunotherapies is associated with low objective response rates and short progression-free survival, and thus, meaningful benefits to patients are minimal. Chemotherapy has limited utility in the contemporary management of cutaneous melanoma (with a few exceptions, discussed herein) and should not be the standard treatment sequence following failure of first-line therapies. Instead, enrolment onto clinical trials should be standard-of-care in these patients.