Clinical and Biomarker Analysis of a Phase I/II Study of PDR001 plus Imatinib for Advanced Treatment-refractory Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors.

PURPOSE: In this phase Ib/II study, we aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of PDR001, an anti-PD-1 antibody, in combination with imatinib in patients with treatment-refractory gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Advanced GIST patients whose disease had progressed on imatinib, sunitinib, and regorafenib were enrolled. In phase Ib, the standard 3+3 dose escalation scheme was applied. PDR001 400 mg intravenously every 4 weeks plus imatinib (300 mg and 400 mg daily for dose levels I and II, respectively) was given. The primary outcome for phase II was the disease control rate (DCR) at 12 weeks. Exploratory biomarker analysis was performed based on PD-L1 immunohistochemistry, next-generation sequencing, and multiplexed immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: No dose-limiting toxicity was observed in the phase Ib part (n=10), and dose level 2 was selected as the recommended phase II dose. In the phase II part (n=29), there was no objective response and the DCR at 12 weeks was 37.9%, not meeting the primary efficacy endpoint. For patients in phase Ib-dose level II and phase II (n=36), the median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival were 2.3 and 9.5 months, respectively. The most common grade 3-4 adverse event was anemia. Exploratory biomarker analysis indicated that a higher CD8+ T cell density was associated with a favorable PFS, but to a limited degree. Tumor mutation burden and PD-L1 were not associated with better PFS. CONCLUSION: In patients with treatment-refractory GIST, PDR001 in combination with imatinib was generally tolerable, but it was not effective.

Prognostic value of mismatch repair deficiency in patients receiving first-line fluoropyrimidine plus platinum for metastatic, recurrent, or unresectable gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: We examined the impact of mismatch repair (MMR) status on efficacy of first-line fluoropyrimidine plus platinum (FP) chemotherapy in patients with HER2-negative metastatic, recurrent, or unresectable gastric cancer (mGC). METHODS: Patients with mGC receiving first-line FP between 2015 and 2018 at Asan Medical Center, Korea, were reviewed. We evaluated the clinical characteristics and the efficacy of chemotherapy according to MMR status in patients with available immunohistochemistry results. RESULTS: Of 895 patients, we analyzed 543 with available MMR protein expression results, and deficient MMR (dMMR) was detected in 4.4% (n = 24). Patients with dMMR exhibited a significantly higher median age than those with proficient MMR (pMMR) (64 vs. 58 years, p = 0.044). No signet ring cell carcinoma (SRCC) was detected among dMMR tumors, whereas SRCC was found in 17.5% of pMMR. Objective response rate was 27.3% in dMMR and 34.3% in pMMR (p = 0.556). No difference in progression-free survival was noted between patients with dMMR and pMMR (median, 5.6 vs. 5.8 months, p = 0.266). Patients with dMMR tended to have better overall survival than those with pMMR although this difference was not statistically significant (median, 17.9 vs. 12.2 months, p = 0.183). CONCLUSIONS: Efficacy of first-line FP was not different by MMR status in mGC patients.

Adjuvant treatment for locally advanced gastric cancer: an Asian perspective.

Standard adjuvant treatment for locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC) is regionally different. Whereas perioperative chemotherapy is the standard in Western populations, D2 gastrectomy followed by adjuvant chemotherapy has been the standard in East Asia. Recently, the pivotal phase 3 PRODIGY and RESOLVE studies have demonstrated survival benefits of adding neoadjuvant chemotherapy to surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy over up-front surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy in Asian patients. Based on these results, neoadjuvant chemotherapy is considered one of the viable options for patients with LAGC. In this review, various aspects of neoadjuvant chemotherapy will be discussed for its optimal application in Asia. Candidates for neoadjuvant chemotherapy should be carefully chosen in consideration of the inaccurate aspects of radiological clinical staging and its potential benefit over up-front surgery followed by a decision on adjuvant chemotherapy according to the pathological stage. Efforts should continuously be made to optimally apply neoadjuvant chemotherapy to patients with LAGC, considering various factors, including a more accurate radiological assessment of the tumor burden and the optimization of post-operative chemotherapy. Future neoadjuvant trials involving novel agents for Asian patients should be designed based on proven Asian regimens rather than adopting Western regimens.

Bemarituzumab as first-line treatment for locally advanced or metastatic gastric/gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma: final analysis of the randomized phase 2 FIGHT trial.

BACKGROUND: We report the final results of the randomized phase 2 FIGHT trial that evaluated bemarituzumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody selective for fibroblast growth factor receptor 2b (FGFR2b), plus mFOLFOX6 in patients with FGFR2b-positive (2 + /3 + membranous staining by immunohistochemistry), HER-2-negative gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer (GC). METHODS: Patients received bemarituzumab (15 mg/kg) or placebo once every 2 weeks with an additional bemarituzumab (7.5 mg/kg) or placebo dose on cycle 1 day 8. All patients received mFOLFOX6. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), objective response rate, and safety. Efficacy was evaluated after a minimum follow-up of 24 months. RESULTS: In the bemarituzumab-mFOLFOX6 (N = 77) and placebo-mFOLFOX6 (N = 78) arms, respectively, 59.7% and 66.7% of patients were FGFR2b-positive in ≥ 10% of tumor cells. The median PFS (95% confidence interval [CI]) was 9.5 months (7.3-13.7) with bemarituzumab-mFOLFOX6 and 7.4 months (5.7-8.4) with placebo-mFOLFOX6 (hazard ratio [HR], 0.72; 95% CI 0.49-1.08); median OS (95% CI) was 19.2 (13.6-24.2) and 13.5 (9.3-15.9) months, respectively (HR 0.77; 95% CI 0.52-1.14). Observed efficacy in FGFR2b-positive GC in ≥ 10% of tumor cells was: PFS: HR 0.43 (95% CI 0.26-0.73); OS: HR 0.52 (95% CI 0.31-0.85). No new safety findings were reported. CONCLUSIONS: In FGFR2b-positive advanced GC, the combination of bemarituzumab-mFOLFOX6 led to numerically longer median PFS and OS compared with mFOLFOX6 alone. Efficacy was more pronounced with FGFR2b overexpression in ≥ 10% of tumor cells. Confirmatory phase 3 trials are ongoing (NCT05052801, NCT05111626). CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03694522.

Phase 1/2a Study of Rivoceranib, a Selective VEGFR-2 Angiogenesis Inhibitor, in Patients with Advanced Solid Tumors.

Purpose: To report the results from an early-phase study of rivoceranib, an oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor highly selective for vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2, in patients with advanced solid tumors. Materials and Methods: In this open-label, single-arm, dose-escalating, multicenter three-part phase 1/2a trial, patients had advanced solid tumors refractory to conventional therapy. Part 1 evaluated the safety and pharmacokinetics of five ascending once-daily doses of rivoceranib from 81 mg to 685 mg. Part 2 evaluated the safety and antitumor activity of once-daily rivoceranib 685 mg. Part 3 was conducted later, due to lack of MTD determination in part 1, to evaluate the safety and preliminary efficacy of once-daily rivoceranib 805 mg in patients with unresectable or advanced gastric cancer. Results: A total of 61 patients were enrolled in parts 1 (n=25), 2 (n=30), and 3 (n=6). In parts 1 and 2, patients were white (45.5%) or Asian (54.5%), and 65.6% were male. The most common grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) were hypertension (32.7%), hyponatremia (10.9%), and hypophosphatemia (10.9%). The overall response rate (ORR) was 15.2%. In part 3, dose-limiting toxicities occurred in 2 out of 6 patients: grade 3 febrile neutropenia decreased appetite, and fatigue. The ORR was 33%. Conclusion: The recommended phase 2 dose of rivoceranib was determined to be 685 mg once daily, which showed adequate efficacy with a manageable safety profile. (NCT01497704 and NCT02711969).

Rivoceranib, a VEGFR-2 inhibitor, monotherapy in previously treated patients with advanced or metastatic gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer (ANGEL study): an international, randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Rivoceranib is an oral, selective tyrosine kinase inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2. ANGEL (NCT03042611) was a global, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study evaluating rivoceranib as 3rd-line or ≥4th-line therapy in patients with advanced/metastatic gastric or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer. METHODS: Patients had failed ≥2 lines of chemotherapy and were randomized 2:1 to rivoceranib 700 mg once daily or placebo with best supportive care. PRIMARY ENDPOINT: overall survival (OS) in the intention-to-treat population. Secondary endpoints: progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and disease control rate (DCR) by blinded independent central review (BICR). RESULTS: In total, 460 patients (rivoceranib n = 308, placebo n = 152) were enrolled. OS was not statistically different for rivoceranib versus placebo (median 5.78 vs. 5.13 months; hazard ratio [HR] 0.93, 95% CI 0.74-1.15; p = 0.4724). PFS by BICR (median 2.83 vs. 1.77 months; HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.47-0.71; p < 0.0001), ORR (6.5% vs. 1.3%; p = 0.0119), and DCR (40.3 vs. 13.2%; p < 0.0001) were improved with rivoceranib versus placebo. In patients receiving ≥4th-line therapy, OS (median 6.34 vs. 4.73 months; p = 0.0192) and PFS by BICR (median 3.52 vs. 1.71 months; p < 0.0001) were improved with rivoceranib versus placebo. The most common grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events with rivoceranib were hypertension (17.9%), anemia (10.4%), aspartate aminotransferase increased (9.4%), asthenia (8.5%), and proteinuria (7.5%). CONCLUSIONS: This study did not meet its primary OS endpoint. Compared to placebo, rivoceranib improved PFS, ORR, and DCR. Rivoceranib also improved OS in a prespecified patient subgroup receiving ≥4th-line therapy.

Ripretinib versus sunitinib in gastrointestinal stromal tumor: ctDNA biomarker analysis of the phase 3 INTRIGUE trial.

INTRIGUE was an open-label, phase 3 study in adult patients with advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumor who had disease progression on or intolerance to imatinib and who were randomized to once-daily ripretinib 150 mg or sunitinib 50 mg. In the primary analysis, progression-free survival (PFS) with ripretinib was not superior to sunitinib. In clinical and nonclinical studies, ripretinib and sunitinib have demonstrated differential activity based on the exon location of KIT mutations. Therefore, we hypothesized that mutational analysis using circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) might provide further insight. In this exploratory analysis (N = 362), baseline peripheral whole blood was analyzed by a 74-gene ctDNA next-generation sequencing-based assay. ctDNA was detected in 280/362 (77%) samples with KIT mutations in 213/362 patients (59%). Imatinib-resistant mutations were found in the KIT ATP-binding pocket (exons 13/14) and activation loop (exons 17/18). Mutational subgroup assessment showed 2 mutually exclusive populations with differential treatment effects. Patients with only KIT exon 11 + 13/14 mutations (ripretinib, n = 21; sunitinib, n = 20) had better PFS with sunitinib versus ripretinib (median, 15.0 versus 4.0 months). Patients with only KIT exon 11 + 17/18 mutations (ripretinib, n = 27; sunitinib, n = 25) had better PFS with ripretinib versus sunitinib (median, 14.2 versus 1.5 months). The results of this exploratory analysis suggest ctDNA sequencing may improve the prediction of the efficacy of single-drug therapies and support further evaluation of ripretinib in patients with KIT exon 11 + 17/18 mutations. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03673501.

GASTric Cancer HER2 Re-Assessment Study 2 (GASTHER2): HER2 Re-assessment for Initially HER2-Negative Advanced Gastric Cancer Patients after Progression on First-Line Treatment.

PURPOSE: Heterogeneous human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) overexpression in gastric cancer may lead to a misdiagnosis of HER2 status. Accurate assessment of HER2 status is essential for optimal treatment as novel HER2-directed agents are being investigated in various clinical settings. We evaluated the usefulness of HER2 re-assessment following progression on first-line treatment in initially HER2-negative advanced gastric cancer (AGC) patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We enrolled 177 patients with baseline HER2-negative AGC and performed HER2 re-assessment after progression on first-line treatment from February 2012 to June 2016 at Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea. The re-assessed HER2 status was analyzed with baseline HER2 status and clinical characteristics. RESULTS: The median age was 54 years (range, 24 to 80 years), and 123 patients (69.5%) were men. Seven patients (4.0%) were HER2-positive on the re-assessment. Patients with baseline HER2 negativity confirmed by a single test (n=100) had a higher HER2-positive re-assessment rate compared to those who had repeated baseline testing (n=77) (5.0% vs. 2.6%). Among the patients with single baseline HER2 testing, the rate was higher in patients with baseline HER2 immunohistochemistry (IHC) 1+ compared to those with IHC 0 (13.4% vs. 3.6%). CONCLUSION: Overall, 4.0% of patients with baseline HER2-negative AGC were HER2-positive on re-assessment, and the HER2-positive re-assessment rate was higher among patients who had a single test at baseline. HER2 re assessment may be considered for initially HER2-negative patients to determine their eligibility for HER2-directed therapy, particularly if their HER2 negativity was determined by a single test, especially if they had a single baseline HER2 IHC 1+ test.

DNA mismatch repair deficiency and outcomes of patients with locally advanced gastric cancer treated with preoperative docetaxel, oxaliplatin, and S-1 plus surgery and postoperative S-1 or surgery plus postoperative S-1: a sub-analysis of the phase 3 PRODIGY trial.

BACKGROUND: The benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC) patients with DNA mismatch repair (MMR) deficiency (D-MMR) is controversial due to concerns about its potential detrimental effect. The PRODIGY trial showed the survival benefit of adding preoperative docetaxel, oxaliplatin, and S-1 (DOS) to surgery plus postoperative S-1 for LAGC patients. In this sub-analysis, we evaluated the benefit of preoperative DOS according to MMR status. METHODS: Among patients enrolled in the PRODIGY trial treated with either preoperative DOS followed by surgery and postoperative S-1 (CSC arm), or surgery and postoperative S-1 (SC arm) at Asan Medical Center (n = 249), those in the full analysis set with available tissue to assess MMR status were included in the present analysis. RESULTS: A total of 231 patients (CSC arm, n = 108; SC arm, n = 123) were included (median age, 58 years [range, 27-75]), and 21 patients (CSC arm, n = 8 [7.4%]; SC arm, n = 13 [10.6%]) had D-MMR tumors. Progression-free survival and overall survival tended to be superior in the CSC arm than in the SC arm among D-MMR patients (HR 0.48 [95% CI 0.09-2.50]; log-rank P = 0.37 and HR 0.55 [95% CI 0.11-2.86]; log-rank P = 0.46, respectively), as well as among proficient MMR (P-MMR) patients (HR 0.68 [95% CI 0.46-1.03]; log-rank P = 0.07 and HR 0.75 [95% CI 0.49-1.14]; log-rank P = 0.17, respectively). CONCLUSION: Preoperative DOS followed by surgery and postoperative S-1 may be considered a treatment option for LAGC patients regardless of MMR status.

Clinical outcomes of Epstein-Barr virus (EBV)-associated metastatic and locally advanced unresectable gastric cancers (GCs) in patients receiving first-line fluoropyrimidine and platinum (FP) doublet chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Epstein-Barr virus-associated gastric cancer (EBVaGC) is a distinct molecular subgroup showing excellent outcomes after surgery for localized disease. Prominent immune cell infiltration in EBVaGC reflects the immunogenicity of Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) and, as suggested by some investigators, responsiveness to immune checkpoint inhibitors in the palliative setting. However, few data are available on the prevalence, clinical characteristics, and prognosis of EBVaGC patients receiving palliative cytotoxic chemotherapy. METHODS: In this retrospective study, we identified 1061 patients with metastatic, recurrent, or locally advanced unresectable gastric cancer (GC) who started first-line fluoropyrimidine/platinum (FP) doublet chemotherapy with or without trastuzumab from January 2015 to August 2018. For 766 patients with available tumor tissue, the presence of EBV in cancer cells was evaluated by EBV-encoded RNA in situ hybridization and correlated with clinical characteristics and treatment outcomes. RESULTS: Among the patients evaluated (n = 766), 40 (5.0%) were EBV-positive. EBVaGC was associated with male sex (p = 0.009) and lower neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR < 2.46, p = 0.03). Efficacy of first-line FP chemotherapy, in terms of response rate ad progression-free survival (PFS), did not differ between EBVaGC and EBV-negative GC (overall response rate: 53.8% vs. 51.8%, p = 0.99; median PFS: 6.4 vs. 6.7 months, p = 0.90). However, overall survival tended to be better with EBVaGC than EBV-negative GC (16.4 vs. 14.0 months, p = 0.07). CONCLUSIONS: EBVaGC accounted for 5% of metastatic/unresectable GCs. While EBVaGC was not associated with better response to or PFS following first-line cytotoxic chemotherapy, it showed a trend toward better overall survival.

Plain language summary of the HIMALAYA study: tremelimumab and durvalumab for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (liver cancer).

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This is a summary of results from a phase 3 clinical study called HIMALAYA. HIMALAYA looked at treatment with one dose of a medication called tremelimumab combined with multiple doses of a medication called durvalumab (the STRIDE regimen) or multiple doses of durvalumab alone. These treatments were compared with a medication called sorafenib in participants with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). HCC is a type of liver cancer that is difficult to treat because it is often diagnosed when it is unresectable, meaning it can no longer be removed with surgery. Sorafenib has been the main treatment for unresectable HCC since 2007. However, people who take sorafenib may experience side effects that can reduce their quality of life, so alternative medicines are being trialed. Tremelimumab and durvalumab are types of drugs called immunotherapies, and they both work in different ways to help the body's immune system fight cancer. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS OF THE STUDY?: Participants who took STRIDE lived longer than participants who took sorafenib, whilst participants who took durvalumab alone lived a similar length of time as participants who took sorafenib. Participants who took STRIDE or durvalumab had a lower relative risk of experiencing worsening in their quality of life than participants who took sorafenib. The side effects that participants who received STRIDE or durvalumab experienced were expected for these types of treatments and could mostly be managed. WHAT DO THE RESULTS OF THE STUDY MEAN?: Overall, STRIDE is more effective than sorafenib for people with unresectable HCC.

Patient-reported outcomes and tolerability in patients receiving ripretinib versus sunitinib after treatment with imatinib in INTRIGUE, a phase 3, open-label study.

PURPOSE: In the INTRIGUE trial, ripretinib showed no significant difference versus sunitinib in progression-free survival for patients with advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumour (GIST) previously treated with imatinib. We compared the impact of these treatments on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomised 1:1 to once-daily ripretinib 150 mg or once-daily sunitinib 50 mg (4 weeks on/2 weeks off). Patient-reported outcomes were assessed using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire for Cancer-30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) questionnaire at day (D)1, and D29 of all cycles until treatment discontinuation. Change from baseline was calculated. Time without symptoms or toxicity (TWiST) was estimated as the mean number of days without progression, death, or grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events per patient over 1 year of follow-up. RESULTS: Questionnaire completion at baseline was 88.1% (199/226) for ripretinib and 87.7% (199/227) for sunitinib and remained high for enrolled patients throughout treatment. Patients receiving sunitinib demonstrated within-cycle variation in self-reported HRQoL, corresponding to the on/off dosing regimen. Patients receiving ripretinib reported better HRQoL at D29 assessments than patients receiving sunitinib on all scales except constipation. HRQoL was similar between treatments at D1 assessments, following 2 weeks without treatment for sunitinib patients. TWiST was greater for ripretinib patients (173 versus 126 days). CONCLUSION: Patients receiving ripretinib experienced better HRQoL than patients receiving sunitinib during the dosing period and similar HRQoL to patients who had not received sunitinib for 2 weeks for all QLQ-C30 domains except constipation. Ripretinib may provide clinically meaningful benefit to patients with advanced GIST previously treated with imatinib.

Long-term outcomes of a phase II study of neoadjuvant imatinib in large gastrointestinal stromal tumors of the stomach.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant treatment is recommended for large GISTs due to their friability and risk of extensive operations; however, studies on the indications and long-term results of this approach are lacking. METHODS: Patients with large (≥ 10 cm) gastric GISTs were enrolled from multiple centers in Korea and Japan after a pathologic confirmation of c-KIT ( +) GISTs. Imatinib (400 mg/d) was given for 6-9 months preoperatively, and R0 resection was intended. Postoperative imatinib was given for at least 12 months and recommended for 3 years. RESULTS: A total of 56 patients were enrolled in this study, with 53 patients receiving imatinib treatment at least once and 48 patients undergoing R0 resection. The 5-year overall survival and progression-free survival rates were 94.3% and 61.6%, respectively. Even patients with stable disease by RECIST criteria responded well to preoperative imatinib treatment and could undergo R0 resection, with most being evaluated as partial response by CHOI criteria. The optimal reduction in tumor size was achieved with preoperative imatinib treatment for 24 weeks or more. No resumption of imatinib treatment was identified as an independent prognostic factor for recurrence after R0 resection. No additional size criteria for a higher risk of recurrence were identified in this cohort with a size of 10 cm or more. CONCLUSIONS: Neoadjuvant imatinib treatment is an effective treatment option for gastric GISTs 10 cm or larger. Postoperative imatinib treatment is recommended even after R0 resection to minimize recurrence.

A randomised phase 2 study of continuous or intermittent dosing schedule of imatinib re-challenge in patients with tyrosine kinase inhibitor-refractory gastrointestinal stromal tumours.

BACKGROUND: Imatinib re-challenge is one of the available therapeutic options for patients with treatment-refractory gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GIST). Intermittent dosing of imatinib was suggested to delay outgrow of the imatinib-resistant clones in a preclinical study, and it could potentially reduce the adverse events. METHODS: A randomised phase 2 study was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a continuous or intermittent imatinib schedule in GIST patients whose disease had progressed to at least imatinib and sunitinib. RESULTS: Fifty patients were included in the full analysis set. The disease control rate at 12 weeks was 34.8% and 43.5%, and median progression-free survival was 1.68 and 1.57 months in the continuous and intermittent groups, respectively. The frequency of diarrhoea, anorexia, decreased neutrophil, or dysphagia was lower in the intermittent group. The scores for global health status/quality of life was not significantly deteriorated over the 8 weeks in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: The intermittent dosage did not improve the efficacy outcomes as compared to the continuous dosage, but showed slightly better safety profiles. Given the limited efficacy of imatinib re-challenge, intermittent dosage may also be considered in clinical circumstances where standard fourth-line agent is unavailable or all other viable treatments failed.

Zolbetuximab plus mFOLFOX6 in patients with CLDN18.2-positive, HER2-negative, untreated, locally advanced unresectable or metastatic gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (SPOTLIGHT): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Zolbetuximab, a monoclonal antibody targeting claudin-18 isoform 2 (CLDN18.2), has shown efficacy in patients with CLDN18.2-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative, locally advanced unresectable or metastatic gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma. We report the results of the SPOTLIGHT trial, which investigated the efficacy and safety of first-line zolbetuximab plus mFOLFOX6 (modified folinic acid [or levofolinate], fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin regimen) versus placebo plus mFOLFOX6 in patients with CLDN18.2-positive, HER2-negative, locally advanced unresectable or metastatic gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma. METHODS: SPOTLIGHT is a global, randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 3 trial that enrolled patients from 215 centres in 20 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with CLDN18.2-positive (defined as ≥75% of tumour cells showing moderate-to-strong membranous CLDN18 staining), HER2-negative (based on local or central evaluation), previously untreated, locally advanced unresectable or metastatic gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma, with radiologically evaluable disease (measurable or non-measurable) according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1; an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 or 1; and adequate organ function. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via interactive response technology and stratified according to region, number of organs with metastases, and previous gastrectomy. Patients received zolbetuximab (800 mg/m2 loading dose followed by 600 mg/m2 every 3 weeks) plus mFOLFOX6 (every 2 weeks) or placebo plus mFOLFOX6. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival assessed by independent review committee in all randomly assigned patients. Safety was assessed in all treated patients. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03504397, and is closed to new participants. FINDINGS: Between June 21, 2018, and April 1, 2022, 565 patients were randomly assigned to receive either zolbetuximab plus mFOLFOX6 (283 patients; the zolbetuximab group) or placebo plus mFOLFOX6 (282 patients; the placebo group). At least one dose of treatment was administered to 279 (99%) of 283 patients in the zolbetuximab group and 278 (99%) of 282 patients in the placebo group. In the zolbetuximab group, 176 (62%) patients were male and 107 (38%) were female. In the placebo group, 175 (62%) patients were male and 107 (38%) were female. The median follow-up duration for progression-free survival was 12·94 months in the zolbetuximab group versus 12·65 months in the placebo group. Zolbetuximab treatment showed a significant reduction in the risk of disease progression or death compared with placebo (hazard ratio [HR] 0·75, 95% CI 0·60-0·94; p=0·0066). The median progression-free survival was 10·61 months (95% CI 8·90-12·48) in the zolbetuximab group versus 8·67 months (8·21-10·28) in the placebo group. Zolbetuximab treatment also showed a significant reduction in the risk of death versus placebo (HR 0·75, 95% CI 0·60-0·94; p=0·0053). Treatment-emergent grade 3 or worse adverse events occurred in 242 (87%) of 279 patients in the zolbetuximab group versus 216 (78%) of 278 patients in the placebo group. The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were nausea, vomiting, and decreased appetite. Treatment-related deaths occurred in five (2%) patients in the zolbetuximab group versus four (1%) patients in the placebo group. No new safety signals were identified. INTERPRETATION: Targeting CLDN18.2 with zolbetuximab significantly prolonged progression-free survival and overall survival when combined with mFOLFOX6 versus placebo plus mFOLFOX6 in patients with CLDN18.2-positive, HER2-negative, locally advanced unresectable or metastatic gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma. Zolbetuximab plus mFOLFOX6 might represent a new first-line treatment in these patients. FUNDING: Astellas Pharma, Inc.

Circulating Tumor DNA as a Predictive Biomarker for Clinical Outcomes With Margetuximab and Pembrolizumab in Pretreated HER2-Positive Gastric/ Gastroesophageal Adenocarcinoma.

PURPOSE: To assess the ability of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA)-based testing to identify patients with HER2 (encoded by ERBB2)-positive gastric/gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (GEA) who progressed on or after trastuzumab-containing treatments were treated with combination therapy of anti-HER2 and anti-PD-1 agents. METHODS: ctDNA analysis was performed retrospectively using plasma samples collected at study entry from 86 patients participating in the phase 1/2 CP-MGAH22-05 study (NCT02689284). RESULTS: Objective response rate (ORR) was significantly higher in evaluable ERBB2 amplification-positive vs - negative patients based on ctDNA analysis at study entry (37% vs 6%, respectively; P = .00094). ORR was 23% across all patients who were evaluable for response. ERBB2 amplification was detected at study entry in 57% of patients (all HER2 positive at diagnosis), and detection was higher (88%) when HER2 status was determined by immunohistochemistry fewer than 6 months before study entry. ctDNA was detected in 98% (84/86) of patients tested at study entry. Codetected ERBB2-activating mutations were not associated with response. CONCLUSIONS: Current ERBB2 status may be more effective than archival status at predicting clinical benefit from margetuximab plus pembrolizumab therapy. ctDNA testing for ERBB2 status prior to treatment will spare patients from repeat tissue biopsies, which may be reserved for reflex testing when ctDNA is not detected.

Interruption of imatinib in advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumor after prolonged imatinib maintenance in the absence of gross tumor lesions.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend indefinite imatinib treatment for advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) patients. Imatinib-refractory progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival were previously reported not to differ between GIST patients who interrupted imatinib and those who did not. METHODS: Clinical outcomes of 77 consecutive patients with recurrent or metastatic GIST who interrupted imatinib treatment after maintaining years of imatinib treatment in the absence of gross tumor lesions were retrospectively analyzed. Associations between clinical factors and progression-free survival (PFS) following imatinib interruption were analyzed. RESULTS: The median time from the absence of gross tumor lesions to imatinib interruption was 61.5 months. Since imatinib interruption, the median PFS was 19.6 months, and 4 patients (26.3%) remained progression-free for longer than 5 years. Among the patients who had progressive disease following the interruption, imatinib re-introduction led to an 88.6% objective response rate and a 100% disease control rate. Complete removal of the initial gross tumor lesion(s) and complete removal of the residual gross tumor lesion(s) by local treatment (vs. no local treatment or residual lesions after local treatment) were independently associated with favorable PFS. CONCLUSION: Interruption of imatinib following prolonged maintenance in the absence of gross tumor lesions led to disease progression in the majority of cases. However, re-introduction of imatinib resulted in effective tumor control. Unmaintained remission seems to be possible in some patients with metastatic or recurrent GIST after a prolonged remission with imatinib if there is complete removal of any gross tumor lesions.

INTEGRATE II: randomised phase III controlled trials of regorafenib containing regimens versus standard of care in refractory Advanced Gastro-Oesophageal Cancer (AGOC): a study by the Australasian Gastro-Intestinal Trials Group (AGITG).

BACKGROUND: Advanced gastro-oesophageal cancer (AGOC) carries a poor prognosis. No standard of care treatment options are available after first and second-line therapies. Regorafenib is an oral multi-targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor targeting angiogenic, stromal, and oncogenic receptor tyrosine kinases. Regorafenib 160 mg daily prolonged progression free survival compared to placebo (INTEGRATE, phase 2). Regorafenib 80 mg daily in combination with nivolumab 3 mg/kg showed promising objective response rates (REGONIVO). METHODS/DESIGN: INTEGRATE II (INTEGRATE IIa and IIb) platform comprises two international phase III randomised controlled trials (RCT) with 2:1 randomisation in favor of experimental intervention. INTEGRATE IIa (double-blind) compares regorafenib 160 mg daily on days 1 to 21 of each 28-day cycle to placebo. INTEGRATE IIb (open label) compares REGONIVO, regorafenib 90 mg days 1 to 21 in combination with intravenous nivolumab 240 mg days 1 and 15 each 28-day cycle with investigator's choice of chemotherapy (control). Treatment continues until disease progression or intolerable adverse events as per protocol. Eligible participants include adults with AGOC who have failed two or more lines of treatment. Stratification is by location of tumour (INTEGRATE IIa only), geographic region, prior VEGF inhibitor and prior immunotherapy use (INTEGRATE IIb only). Primary endpoint is overall survival. Secondary endpoints are progression free survival, objective response rate, quality of life, and safety. Tertiary/correlative objectives include biomarker and pharmacokinetic evaluation. DISCUSSION: INTEGRATE II provides a platform to evaluate the clinical utility of regorafenib alone, as well as regorafenib in combination with nivolumab in treatment of participants with refractory AGOC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: INTEGRATE IIa prospectively registered 1 April 2016 Australia New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry: ACTRN12616000420448 (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02773524). INTEGRATE IIb prospectively registered 10 May 2021 ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04879368.

Randomized phase II study of capecitabine plus cisplatin with or without sorafenib in patients with metastatic gastric cancer (STARGATE).

BACKGROUND: In this randomized phase II study, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of sorafenib in combination with capecitabine and cisplatin (XP) as first-line chemotherapy in advanced gastric cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with metastatic gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma were randomized (1:1) to receive either sorafenib plus XP (S + XP) or XP alone. In cases of disease progression in the XP arm, crossover to sorafenib alone was allowed. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). The secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), response rates, safety profiles, and biomarkers, and the response rates and PFS with secondline sorafenib alone after progression in the XP arm. RESULTS: Between Jan 2011 and Feb 2013, a total of 195 patients were accrued (97 in the S + XP arm and 98 in the XP alone arm). The overall response rate was 54% with S + XP, and 52% with XP alone (p = 0.83). With a median follow-up of 12.6 months (range, 0.1-29.2), the median PFS assessed by independent review was 5.6 months in the S + XP arm and 5.3 months in the XP arm (hazard ratio [HR] 0.92, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.67-1.27, p = 0.61). Overall survival was not different between the two arms (median 11.7 vs. 10.8 months; HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.65-1.31, p = 0.66). Frequencies of grade 3/4 toxicities were similar between the S + XP and XP alone arms, except for neutropenia (21% vs. 37%), anorexia (0% vs. 5%), and hand-foot skin reaction (7% vs. 1%). Among 51 patients who crossed over to sorafenib alone after disease progression in the XP arm, there was no objective response and their median PFS was 1.3 months (95% CI, 1.2-1.7). CONCLUSION: The addition of sorafenib to XP chemotherapy was safe but not more effective than XP alone for first-line treatment of metastatic gastric cancer.