Relative bioavailability and food effect study of an oral suspension of alectinib in healthy volunteers using venipuncture and capillary microsampling.

Alectinib, approved as 150 mg capsules for the treatment of adults with advanced ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancer, is being assessed in children with ALK-positive solid and central nervous system tumors. An ad hoc pediatric-friendly suspension of alectinib, prepared from capsule contents, is under investigation as an alternative formulation for children who cannot swallow capsules. This randomized, crossover, relative bioavailability, and food effect study evaluated alectinib administered as an oral suspension versus capsule formulation following conventional venipuncture and capillary microsampling. A total of 28 healthy adult subjects received a 600 mg single dose of alectinib in two groups: fasted (n = 14) and mixed fed (n = 14; seven receiving high-fat meal and seven receiving low-fat meal). Combined alectinib + M4 (active metabolite) exposure was higher for suspension versus capsule, with geometric mean ratio (GMR) of 2.6 for area under the concentration-time curve extrapolated to infinity (AUC0-∞ ) and 3.0 for maximum observed concentration (Cmax ) under fasted conditions, and 1.7 for both parameters for mixed fed. The suspension showed increased alectinib + M4 AUC0-∞ following a high-fat meal versus fasted conditions (GMR 1.7 [90% confidence interval 1.4-2.2]). Alectinib AUC0-∞ and Cmax measured in venous and capillary samples were generally similar for the suspension and capsule. Single oral doses of 600 mg alectinib suspension and capsule were well tolerated, with no safety concerns. Based on these findings, the oral suspension of alectinib appears suitable for use in pediatric studies after appropriate dose adjustment relative to the capsule.

Advancing drug development in pediatric oncology, a focus on cancer biology and targeted therapies: iMATRIX platform.

With the development of novel treatment therapies as well as evolving and innovative approaches to conduct clinical trials, the landscape of pediatric oncology drug development has dramatically changed in recent years. Despite this change, approvals for new drugs and labeling updates to ensure availability of proper treatment for pediatric patients with cancer remain slow. The context of drug development in pediatric tumors has also changed with regulatory initiatives in the US and Europe, creating a great need for faster development of novel drugs. Today, conventional study designs have been replaced or complemented by novel clinical trial designs, such as master protocols and platform trials, to optimize cancer drug development and enable faster regulatory approval. The iMATRIX platform is a mechanism-of-action (MOA)-based phase 1/2 trial framework for concurrently studying multiple molecules across a range of relevant pediatric tumor types, taking into account the biology of each pediatric tumor type. Six studies have been conducted, ongoing, or planned on the iMATRIX platform - investigating atezolizumab, cobimetinib, entrectinib, idasanutlin, alectinib, and glofitamab. A brief overview of study designs and characteristics are shared in this article, along with learnings from them.

Patient-reported outcomes provide prognostic information for survival in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: Analysis of 1239 patients from the GOYA study.

PURPOSE: We investigated the prognostic value of pretreatment patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) receiving obinutuzumab/rituximab plus chemotherapy in the GOYA phase III study. METHODS: Patients completed the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life (EORTC QLQ-C30) and the Functional assessment of chronic illness therapy-Lymphoma (FACT-Lym) lymphoma subscale (LYMS) during the study. PRO scales with high prognostic value were identified through Cox regression analyses of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). These scales were evaluated in terms of their additional prognostic value beyond the International Prognostic Index (IPI). A preliminary assessment was performed to evaluate whether the scales provided improved patient-risk stratification beyond IPI. RESULTS: One thousand two hundred and fifty-nine patients with valid pretreatment PRO scales were included in the analyses, and complete pretreatment data were available for 1239/1414 patients (87.6%). Four PRO scales with high prognostic value were identified: FACT-Lym LYMS and EORTC QLQ-C30 physical functioning, global health status/quality of life (QoL), and fatigue. All four scales retained significant prognostic value for OS and PFS after IPI adjustment (all p < 0.05). After adjusting for multiple clinical variables (IPI, cell of origin, BCL2 status, and total metabolic tumor volume), all four scales retained significant prognostic value (all p < 0.05) for OS. Only the EORTC QLQ-C30 physical functioning scale was significant (p < 0.05) for PFS after adjustment for multiple clinical variables. CONCLUSIONS: In this large population of patients with DLBCL, pretreatment PROs provided prognostic information for OS and PFS beyond the well-established IPI.

Atezolizumab with enzalutamide versus enzalutamide alone in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: a randomized phase 3 trial.

Early clinical data indicate that some patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer may benefit from program death ligand-1 (PD-L1) inhibition, especially with enzalutamide. The IMbassador250 trial (no. NCT03016312) enrolled 759 men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer whose disease progressed on abiraterone. The addition of atezolizumab to enzalutamide in an open-label randomized trial did not meet the primary endpoint of improved overall survival in unselected patients (stratified hazard ratio 1.12, 95% confidence interval (0.91, 1.37), P = 0.28), despite an acceptable safety profile. In archival tumor samples, prostate tumors showed comparatively low expression of key immune biomarkers. DNA damage-response alterations, phosphatase and tensin homolog status and PD-L1 expression levels were similar between hormone-sensitive and castration-resistant prostate cancers. In planned biomarker analysis, longer progression-free survival was seen with atezolizumab in patients with high PD-L1 IC2/3, CD8 expression and established immune gene signatures. Exploratory analysis linked progression-free survival in the atezolizumab arm with immune genes such as CXCL9 and TAP1, together with other potentially relevant biomarkers including phosphatase and tensin homolog alterations. Together these data indicate that the expected biology associated with response to immune checkpoint inhibitors is present in prostate cancer, albeit in fewer patients. Careful patient selection may be required for immune checkpoint inhibitors to identify subgroups of patients who may benefit from this treatment approach.

A Phase Ib Study of Atezolizumab with Radium-223 Dichloride in Men with Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: Men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) have limited treatment options after progressing on hormonal therapy and chemotherapy. Here, we evaluate the safety and efficacy of atezolizumab (anti-PD-L1) + radium-223 dichloride (radium-223) in men with mCRPC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This phase Ib study evaluated atezolizumab + radium-223 in men with mCRPC and bone and lymph node and/or visceral metastases that progressed after androgen pathway inhibitor treatment. Following safety assessment of concurrent dosing, 45 men were randomized 1:1:1 to concurrent or one of two staggered dosing schedules with either agent introduced one cycle before the other. This was followed by a safety-efficacy expansion cohort (randomized 1:1:1). The primary endpoints were safety and objective response rate (ORR) by RECIST 1.1. Secondary endpoints included radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS), PSA responses, and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: As of October 4, 2019, 44 of 45 men were evaluable. All 44 had ≥1 all-cause adverse event (AE); 23 (52.3%) had a grade 3/4 AE. Fifteen (34.1%) grade 3/4 and 3 (6.8%) grade 5 AEs were related to atezolizumab; none were related to radium-223. Confirmed ORR was 6.8% [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.4-18.7], median rPFS was 3.0 months (95% CI, 2.8-4.6), median PSA progression was 3.0 months (95% CI, 2.8-3.3), and median OS was 16.3 months (95% CI, 10.9-22.3). CONCLUSIONS: This phase Ib study demonstrated that atezolizumab + radium-223, regardless of administration schedule, had greater toxicity than either drug alone, with no clear evidence of additional clinical benefit for patients with mCRPC and bone and lymph node and/or visceral metastases.