Efficacy, safety, and biomarker analyses of bintrafusp alfa, a bifunctional fusion protein targeting TGF-ß and PD-L1, in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Bintrafusp alfa, a first-in-class bifunctional fusion protein targeting transforming growth factor-ß (TGF-ß) and programmed cell death ligand 1, has demonstrated encouraging efficacy as second-line treatment in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in a dose expansion cohort of the phase 1, open-label clinical trial (NCT02517398). Here, we report the safety, efficacy, and biomarker analysis of bintrafusp alfa in a second expansion cohort of the same trial (biomarker cohort). METHODS: Patients with stage IIIb/IV NSCLC who were either immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-naïve (n=18) or ICI-experienced (n=23) were enrolled. The primary endpoint was the best overall response. Paired biopsies (n=9/41) and peripheral blood (n=14/41) pretreatment and on-treatment were studied to determine the immunological effects of treatment and for associations with clinical activity. RESULTS: Per independent review committee assessment, objective responses were observed in the ICI-naïve group (overall response rate, 27.8%). No new or unexpected safety signals were identified. Circulating TGF-ß levels were reduced (>97%; p<0.001) 2 weeks after initiation of treatment with bintrafusp alfa and remained reduced up to 12 weeks. Increases in lymphocytes and tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs) were observed in on-treatment biospies, with an increase in the M2 (tumor trophic TAMs)/M1 (inflammatory TAMs) ratio associated with poor outcomes. Specific peripheral immune analytes at baseline and early changes after treatment were associated with clinical response. CONCLUSIONS: Bintrafusp alfa was observed to have modest clinical activity and manageable safety, and was associated with notable immunologic changes involving modulation of the tumor immune microenvironment in patients with advanced NSCLC.

Fostamatinib for the treatment of warm antibody autoimmune hemolytic anemia: Phase 2, multicenter, open-label study.

Patients with relapsed warm antibody autoimmune hemolytic anemia (wAIHA) have limited treatment options. Fostamatinib is a potent, orally administered spleen tyrosine kinase inhibitor approved in the United States and Europe for the treatment of adults with chronic immune thrombocytopenia (ITP). This phase 2 study evaluated the response to fostamatinib, administered at 150 mg BID orally with or without food in adults with wAIHA and active hemolysis with hemoglobin (Hgb) <10 g/dL who had failed at least one prior treatment. Hemoglobin levels and safety assessments were performed at visits every 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was Hgb >10 g/dL with an increase of ≥2 g/dL from baseline by week 24 without rescue therapy or red blood cell transfusion. Eleven of 24 (46%) patients achieved the primary endpoint. Increases in median Hgb were detected at week 2 and sustained over time. Median lactate dehydrogenase levels and reticulocyte counts generally declined over time with little change in median haptoglobin levels. The most common adverse events (AEs) were diarrhea (42%), fatigue (42%), hypertension (27%), dizziness (27%), and insomnia (23%). AEs were manageable and consistent with the fostamatinib safety database of over 3900 patients across multiple diseases (rheumatoid arthritis, B-cell lymphoma, COVID-19, and ITP). No new safety signals were detected. Fostamatinib may be a promising therapeutic option for wAIHA. A randomized, double-blind, phase 3 study is nearing completion.

Integrated safety analysis of umbralisib, a dual PI3Kδ/CK1ε inhibitor, in relapsed/refractory lymphoid malignancies.

Phosphoinositide 3-kinase-δ (PI3Kδ) inhibitors are active in lymphoid malignancies, although associated toxicities can limit their use. Umbralisib is a dual inhibitor of PI3Kδ and casein kinase-1ε (CK1ε). This study analyzed integrated comprehensive toxicity data from 4 open-label, phase 1 and 2 studies that included 371 adult patients (median age, 67 years) with relapsed/refractory non-Hodgkin lymphoma (follicular lymphoma [n = 147]; marginal zone lymphoma [n = 82]; diffuse large B-cell lymphoma/mantle cell lymphoma [n = 74]; chronic lymphocytic leukemia [n = 43]; and other tumor types [n = 25]) who were treated with the recommended phase 2 dose of umbralisib 800 mg or higher once daily. At data cutoff, median duration of umbralisib treatment was 5.9 months (range, 0.1-75.1 months), and 107 patients (28.8%) received umbralisib for ≥12 months. Any-grade treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) occurred in 366 (98.7%) of 371 patients, with the most frequent being diarrhea (52.3%), nausea (41.5%), and fatigue (31.8%). Grade 3 or higher treatment-emergent AEs occurred in 189 (50.9%) of 371 patients and included neutropenia (11.3%), diarrhea (7.3%), and increased aminotransferase levels (5.7%). Treatment-emergent serious AEs occurred in 95 (25.6%) of 371 patients. AEs of special interest were limited and included pneumonia (29 of 371 [7.8%]), noninfectious colitis (9 of 371 [2.4%]), and pneumonitis (4 of 371 [1.1%]). AEs led to discontinuation of umbralisib in 51 patients (13.7%). Four patients (1.1%) died of AEs, none of which was deemed related to umbralisib. No cumulative toxicities were reported. The favorable long-term tolerability profile and low rates of immune-mediated toxicities support the potential use of umbralisib for the benefit of a broad population of patients with lymphoid malignancies.

Eflapegrastim, a Long-Acting Granulocyte-Colony Stimulating Factor for the Management of Chemotherapy-Induced Neutropenia: Results of a Phase III Trial.

BACKGROUND: Eflapegrastim, a novel, long-acting recombinant human granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (rhG-CSF), consists of a rhG-CSF analog conjugated to a human IgG4 Fc fragment via a short polyethylene glycol linker. Preclinical and phase I and II pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic data showed increased potency for neutrophil counts for eflapegrastim versus pegfilgrastim. This open-label phase III trial compared the efficacy and safety of eflapegrastim with pegfilgrastim for reducing the risk of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with early-stage breast cancer were randomized 1:1 to fixed-dose eflapegrastim 13.2 mg (3.6 mg G-CSF) or standard pegfilgrastim (6 mg G-CSF) following standard docetaxel plus cyclophosphamide chemotherapy for 4 cycles. The primary objective was to demonstrate the noninferiority of eflapegrastim compared with pegfilgrastim in mean duration of severe neutropenia (DSN; grade 4) in cycle 1. RESULTS: Eligible patients were randomized 1:1 to study arms (eflapegrastim, n = 196; pegfilgrastim, n = 210). The incidence of cycle 1 severe neutropenia was 16% (n = 31) for eflapegrastim versus 24% (n = 51) for pegfilgrastim, reducing the relative risk by 35% (p = .034). The difference in mean cycle 1 DSN (-0.148 day) met the primary endpoint of noninferiority (p < .0001) and also showed statistical superiority for eflapegrastim (p = .013). Noninferiority was maintained for the duration of treatment (all cycles, p < .0001), and secondary efficacy endpoints and safety results were also comparable for study arms. CONCLUSION: These results demonstrate noninferiority and comparable safety for eflapegrastim at a lower G-CSF dose versus pegfilgrastim. The potential for increased potency of eflapegrastim to deliver improved clinical benefit warrants further clinical study in patients at higher risk for CIN. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN) remains a significant clinical dilemma for oncology patients who are striving to complete their prescribed chemotherapy regimen. In a randomized, phase III trial comparing eflapegrastim to pegfilgrastim in the prevention of CIN, the efficacy of eflapegrastim was noninferior to pegfilgrastim and had comparable safety. Nevertheless, the risk of CIN remains a great concern for patients undergoing chemotherapy, as the condition frequently results in chemotherapy delays, dose reductions, and treatment discontinuations.

Association of a Lay Health Worker Intervention With Symptom Burden, Survival, Health Care Use, and Total Costs Among Medicare Enrollees With Cancer.

Importance: Undertreated patient symptoms require approaches that improve symptom burden. Objective: To determine the association of a lay health worker-led symptom screening and referral intervention with symptom burden, survival, health care use, and total costs among Medicare Advantage enrollees with a new diagnosis of solid or hematologic malignant neoplasms. Design, Setting, and Participants: This quality improvement study conducted at 9 community oncology practices from November 1, 2016, to October 31, 2018, compared newly diagnosed Medicare Advantage enrollees with solid or hematologic malignant neoplasms with patients diagnosed and treated 1 year prior. Analysis was conducted from August 1, 2019, to January 11, 2020. Interventions: Usual care augmented by a lay health worker trained to screen symptoms and refer patients to palliative care and behavioral medicine. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was change in symptoms using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale and the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire at baseline and 6 and 12 months after enrollment. Secondary outcomes were between-group comparison of survival, 12-month health care use, and costs. Results: Among 425 patients in the intervention group and 407 patients in the control group, the mean (SD) age was 78.8 (8.3) years, 345 (41.5%) were female, and 407 (48.9%) were non-Hispanic white. Patients in the intervention group experienced a lower symptom burden as measured by the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale score over time compared with patients in the control group (mean [SD] difference, -1.9 [14.2]; 95% CI, -3.77 to -0.19; P = .01 for the intervention group and 2.32 [17.7]; 95% CI, 0.47 to 4.19; P = .02 for the control group). Similar findings were noted in 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire depression scores (mean [SD] difference, -0.63 [3.99]; 95% CI, -1.23 to -0.028; P = .04 for the intervention group and 1.67 [5.49]; 95% CI, 0.95 to 2.37; P = .01 for the control group). Patients in the intervention group compared with patients in the control group had fewer mean (SD) inpatient visits (0.54 [0.77]; 95% CI, 0.47-0.61 vs 0.72 [1.12]; 95% CI, 0.61-0.83; P = .04) and emergency department visits (0.43 [0.76]; 95% CI, 0.36-0.50 vs 0.57 [1.00]; 95% CI, 0.48-0.67; P = .002) per 1000 patients per year and lower total costs (median, $17 869 [interquartile range, $6865-$32 540] vs median, $18 473 [interquartile range, $6415-$37 910]; P = .02). A total of 180 patients in the intervention group and 189 patients in the control group died within 12 months. Among those who died, patients in the intervention group had greater hospice use (125 of 180 [69.4%] vs 79 of 189 [41.8%]; odds ratio, 3.16; 95% CI, 2.13-4.69; P < .001), fewer mean (SD) emergency department and hospital visits (emergency department: 0.10 [0.30]; 95% CI, 0.06-0.14 vs 0.30 [0.46]; 95% CI, 0.24-0.38; P = .001; hospital: 0.27 [0.44]; 95% CI, 0.21-0.34 vs 0.43 [0.82]; 95% CI, 0.32-0.55; P = .02), and lower costs (median, $3602 [interquartile range, $1076-$9436] vs median, $12 726 [interquartile range, $5259-$22 170]; P = .002), but there was no significant difference in inpatient deaths (18 of 180 [10.0%] vs 30 of 189 [15.9%]; P = .14). Conclusions and Relevance: This study suggests that a lay health worker-led intervention may be one way to improve burdensome and costly care.

Lay Health Worker-Led Cancer Symptom Screening Intervention and the Effect on Patient-Reported Satisfaction, Health Status, Health Care Use, and Total Costs: Results From a Tri-Part Collaboration.

PURPOSE: Poor patient experiences and increasing costs from undertreated symptoms require approaches that improve patient-reported outcomes and lower expenditures. We developed and evaluated the effect of a lay health worker (LHW)-led symptom screening intervention on satisfaction, self-reported overall and mental health, health care use, total costs, and survival. METHODS: From November 1, 2015, to September 30, 2016, we enrolled in this study all newly diagnosed Medicare Advantage enrollees with stage 3 or 4 solid tumors or hematologic malignancies who were receiving care in a community oncology practice. We evaluated symptom changes from baseline to 12 months for the intervention group. We compared with a control group (a historical cohort of Medicare Advantage enrollees diagnosed with cancer from November 1, 2014, to October 31, 2015) changes in satisfaction and overall and mental health with validated assessments at diagnosis and 5 months postdiagnosis, 12-month health care use, total costs, and survival. RESULTS: Among 186 patients in the intervention group and 102 in the control group, most were female and non-Hispanic white or Hispanic, and the mean age was 79 years. There were no survival differences between the groups. Relative to the control group, the intervention group experienced improvements in satisfaction with care (difference-in-difference: 1.35; 95% CI, 1.08 to 1.63), overall health (odds ratio, 2.23; 95% CI, 1.49 to 3.32), and mental or emotional health (odds ratio, 2.22; 95% CI, 1.46 to 3.38) over time; fewer hospitalizations (mean ± standard deviation: 0.72 ± 0.96 v 1.02 ± 1.44; P = .03) and emergency department visits per 1,000 members per year (0.61 ± 0.98 v 0.92 ± 1.53; P = .03), and lower median (interquartile range) total health care costs ($21,266 [$8,102-$47,900] v $31,946 [$15,754-$57,369]; P = .02). CONCLUSION: An LHW-led symptom screening intervention could be one solution to improve value-based cancer care.

Pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone in relapsed refractory multiple myeloma after lenalidomide treatment failure.

Patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) for whom the benefits of lenalidomide have been exhausted in early treatment lines need effective therapies. In cohort A of the phase 2 MM-014 trial, we examined the safety and efficacy of pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone immediately after lenalidomide-based treatment failure in patients with RRMM and two prior lines of therapy. Pomalidomide 4 mg was given on days 1 to 21 of 28-day cycles. Dexamethasone 40 mg (20 mg for patients aged >75 years) was given on days 1, 8, 15 and 22 of 28-day cycles. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR), and secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and safety. The intention-to-treat population comprised 56 patients; all received prior lenalidomide (87·5% lenalidomide refractory) and 39 (69·6%) received prior bortezomib. ORR was 32·1% (28·2% in the prior-bortezomib subgroup). Median PFS was 12·2 months (7·9 months in the prior-bortezomib subgroup). Median OS was 41·7 months (38·6 months in the prior-bortezomib subgroup). The most common grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events were anaemia (25·0%), pneumonia (14·3%) and fatigue (14·3%). These findings support earlier sequencing of pomalidomide-based therapy in lenalidomide-pretreated patients with RRMM, including those who have become refractory to lenalidomide. Trial registration: www.ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01946477.

An open-label, dose-ranging study of Rolontis, a novel long-acting myeloid growth factor, in breast cancer.

This randomized, open-label, active-controlled study investigated the safety and efficacy of three doses of Rolontis (eflapegrastim), a novel, long-acting myeloid growth factor, versus pegfilgrastim in breast cancer patients being treated with docetaxel and cyclophosphamide (TC). The primary efficacy endpoint was duration of severe neutropenia (DSN) during the first cycle of treatment. Patients who were candidates for adjuvant/neoadjuvant TC chemotherapy were eligible for participation. TC was administered on Day 1, followed by 45, 135, or 270 µg/kg Rolontis or 6 mg pegfilgrastim on Day 2. Complete blood counts were monitored daily when the absolute neutrophil count (ANC) fell to <1.5 × 109 /L. Up to four cycles of TC were investigated. The difference in DSN (time from ANC <0.5 × 109 /L to ANC recovery ≥2.0 × 109 /L) between the Rolontis and pegfilgrastim groups was -0.28 days (confidence interval [CI]: -0.56, -0.06) at 270 µg/kg, 0.14 days (CI: -0.28, 0.64) at 135 µg/kg, and 0.72 days (CI: 0.19, 1.27) at 45 µg/kg. Noninferiority to pegfilgrastim was demonstrated at 135 µg/kg (P = 0.002) and 270 µg/kg (P < .001), with superiority demonstrated at 270 µg/kg (0.03 days; P = 0.023). The most common treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were bone pain, myalgia, arthralgia, back pain, and elevated white blood cell counts, with similar incidences across groups. All doses of Rolontis were well tolerated, and no new or significant treatment-related toxicities were observed. In Cycle 1, Rolontis demonstrated noninferiority at the 135 µg/kg dose and statistical superiority in DSN at the 270 µg/kg dose when compared to pegfilgrastim.

APF530 versus ondansetron, each in a guideline-recommended three-drug regimen, for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting due to anthracycline plus cyclophosphamide-based highly emetogenic chemotherapy regimens: a post hoc subgroup analysis of the Phase III randomized MAGIC trial.

BACKGROUND: APF530, a novel extended-release granisetron injection, was superior to ondansetron in a guideline-recommended three-drug regimen in preventing delayed-phase chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) among patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) in the double-blind Phase III Modified Absorption of Granisetron In the prevention of CINV (MAGIC) trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This MAGIC post hoc analysis evaluated CINV prevention efficacy and safety of APF530 versus ondansetron, each with fosaprepitant and dexamethasone, in patient subgroup receiving an anthracycline plus cyclophosphamide (AC) regimen. Patients were randomized 1:1 to APF530 500 mg subcutaneously (granisetron 10 mg) or ondansetron 0.15 mg/kg intravenously (IV) (≤16 mg); stratification was by planned cisplatin ≥50 mg/m2 (yes/no). Patients were to receive fosaprepitant 150 mg IV and dexamethasone 12 mg IV on day 1, then dexamethasone 8 mg orally once daily on day 2 and twice daily on days 3 and 4. Patients were mostly younger females (APF530 arm, mean age 54.1 years, female, 99.3%; ondansetron arm, 53.8 years, female 98.3%). The primary end point was delayed-phase (>24-120 hours) complete response (CR). RESULTS: APF530 versus ondansetron regimens achieved numerically better CINV control in delayed and overall (0-120 hours) phases for CR, complete control, total response, rescue medication use, and proportion with no nausea. APF530 trends are consistent with the overall population, although not statistically superior given the underpowered AC subgroup analysis. The APF530 regimen in this population was generally well tolerated, with safety comparable to that of the overall population. CONCLUSION: APF530 plus fosaprepitant and dexamethasone effectively prevented CINV among patients receiving AC-based HEC, a large subgroup in whom CINV control has traditionally been challenging.

A Multicenter, Open-Label, Phase 1b Study of Carfilzomib, Cyclophosphamide, and Dexamethasone in Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Patients (CHAMPION-2).

INTRODUCTION: This phase 1b study evaluated the safety and efficacy of 3 dose levels of carfilzomib when provided with fixed dose oral cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone (KCyd) in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM). PATIENTS AND METHODS: CHAMPION-2 was a multicenter single-arm study. Patients with newly diagnosed secretory MM were enrolled and received KCyd treatment for up to 8 cycles. A 3 + 3 dose escalation scheme was used to evaluate twice-weekly carfilzomib at 36, 45, and 56 mg/m2 dose levels, followed by a dose expansion. RESULTS: No dose-limiting toxicities were observed in any of the dose evaluation cohorts. The KCyd regimen that included the maximum planned carfilzomib dose of 56 mg/m2 twice weekly was brought forward into dose expansion. A total of 16 patients were treated at this dose level. At 56 mg/m2 the overall response rate was 87.5% (95% confidence interval, 61.7-98.4), and the median time to response of 14 patients whose disease responded to therapy was 1 month. At this dose level, common adverse events of grade 3 or higher were anemia (25.0%), neutropenia (18.8%), acute kidney injury (12.5%), and decreased white blood cell count (12.5%). Ten of 16 patients who received carfilzomib at 56 mg/m2 completed all 8 cycles, 5 patients discontinued study therapy before cycle 8 as a result of adverse events, and 1 patient discontinued therapy as a result of progressive disease. CONCLUSION: Carfilzomib in combination with cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone is effective and has manageable toxicity for patients with newly diagnosed MM.

CHAMPION-1: a phase 1/2 study of once-weekly carfilzomib and dexamethasone for relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma.

Carfilzomib, a proteasome inhibitor, is approved in the United States as a single agent, and in combination with dexamethasone or lenalidomide/dexamethasone (KRd) for relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (MM). Under the single-agent and KRd approvals, carfilzomib is administered as a 10-minute IV infusion on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16 of 28-day cycles (20 mg/m(2) [cycle 1, days 1-2]; 27 mg/m(2) thereafter). This multicenter, single-arm, phase 1/2 study, Community Harmonized Assessment of Myeloma Patients via an Integrated Oncology Network-1 (CHAMPION-1), evaluated once-weekly carfilzomib with dexamethasone in relapsed, or relapsed and refractory MM (1-3 prior therapies). Patients received carfilzomib (30-minute IV infusion) on days 1, 8, and 15 of 28-day cycles. The phase 1 portion used a 3 + 3 dose-escalation scheme to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of carfilzomib. During phase 2, patients received carfilzomib on the same schedule at the MTD. Patients received dexamethasone (40 mg) on days 1, 8, 15, and 22; dexamethasone was omitted on day 22 for cycles 9+. A total of 116 patients were enrolled. The MTD was 70 mg/m(2), and 104 patients (phase 1/2) received carfilzomib 70 mg/m(2) At 70 mg/m(2), the median number of prior regimens was 1; and 52% were bortezomib-refractory. At 70 mg/m(2), the most common grade ≥3 adverse events were fatigue (11%) and hypertension (7%). Overall response rate at 70 mg/m(2) was 77%. Median progression-free survival was 12.6 months. These findings merit additional evaluation of the once-weekly dosing regimen. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01677858.

APF530 (granisetron injection extended-release) in a three-drug regimen for delayed CINV in highly emetogenic chemotherapy.

AIM: APF530, extended-release granisetron, provides sustained release for ≥5 days for acute- and delayed-phase chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). We compared efficacy and safety of APF530 versus ondansetron for delayed CINV after highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC), following a guideline-recommended three-drug regimen. METHODS: HEC patients received APF530 500 mg subcutaneously or ondansetron 0.15 mg/kg intravenously, with dexamethasone and fosaprepitant. Primary end point was delayed-phase complete response (no emesis or rescue medication). RESULTS: A higher percentage of APF530 versus ondansetron patients had delayed-phase complete response (p = 0.014). APF530 was generally well tolerated; treatment-emergent adverse event incidence was similar across arms, mostly mild-to-moderate injection-site reactions. CONCLUSION: APF530 versus the standard three-drug regimen provided superior control of delayed-phase CINV following HEC. ClinicalTrials.gov : NCT02106494.