Maximizing treatment opportunities: assessing protocol waivers' impact on safety and outcome in the Drug Rediscovery Protocol.

PURPOSE: Although eligibility criteria are essential in trial design, overly restrictive criteria contribute to low accrual and limited generalizability. To enhance trial inclusivity, there has been growing interest in broadening eligibility criteria, especially for patients with advanced or treatment-refractory disease. Yet, the impact on patient safety remains uncertain. In the Drug Rediscovery Protocol (DRUP), protocol exceptions are frequently requested and occasionally granted. Here we describe the impact of these waivers on treatment safety and efficacy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: DRUP is a multicenter, non-randomized clinical basket trial treating therapy-refractory cancer patients with molecularly targeted- and immunotherapies outside their registered indications (NCT02925234). Here, all granted waivers were revised, analyzed in terms of safety and efficacy outcome, and compared with outcomes of included patients that did not receive a waiver. RESULTS: Between September 1st 2016 and September 1st 2021, protocol waivers were granted for 82 patients (8%) out of 1019 included patients in DRUP. Most waivers (45%) were granted for general- or drug-related eligibility criteria, other categories were out-of-window testing, treatment and testing exceptions. Serious adverse event rate was similar between patients that received a waiver (pW) and patients that did not (pNW): 39% vs. 41%, respectively (P=0.81). The clinical benefit (either objective response or stable disease ≥ 16 weeks) rate of pW was 40% versus 33% in pNW (P=0.43). CONCLUSION: Safety and clinical benefit were preserved in patients for whom a waiver was granted. These data support a more personalized approach in assessing eligibility criteria, especially in trials with widely used and approved drugs accruing patients without other treatment options.

Characterization of discordance between mismatch repair deficiency and microsatellite instability testing may prevent inappropriate treatment with immunotherapy.

In the Drug Rediscovery Protocol (DRUP), patients with cancer are treated based on their tumor molecular profile with approved targeted and immunotherapies outside the labeled indication. Importantly, patients undergo a tumor biopsy for whole-genome sequencing (WGS) which allows for a WGS-based evaluation of routine diagnostics. Notably, we observed that not all biopsies of patients with dMMR/MSI-positive tumors as determined by routine diagnostics were classified as microsatellite-unstable by subsequent WGS. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the discordance rate between routine dMMR/MSI diagnostics and WGS and to further characterize discordant cases. We assessed patients enrolled in DRUP with dMMR/MSI-positive tumors identified by routine diagnostics, who were treated with immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) and for whom WGS data were available. Patient and tumor characteristics, study treatment outcomes, and material from routine care were retrieved from the patient medical records and via Palga (the Dutch Pathology Registry), and were compared with WGS results. Initially, discordance between routine dMMR/MSI diagnostics and WGS was observed in 13 patients (13/121; 11%). The majority of these patients did not benefit from ICB (11/13; 85%). After further characterization, we found that in six patients (5%) discordance was caused by dMMR tumors that did not harbor an MSI molecular phenotype by WGS. In six patients (5%), discordance was false due to the presence of multiple primary tumors (n = 3, 2%) and misdiagnosis of dMMR status by immunohistochemistry (n = 3, 2%). In one patient (1%), the exact underlying cause of discordance could not be identified. Thus, in this group of patients limited to those initially diagnosed with dMMR/MSI tumors by current routine diagnostics, the true assay-based discordance rate between routine dMMR/MSI-positive diagnostics and WGS was 5%. To prevent inappropriate ICB treatment, clinicians and pathologists should be aware of the risk of multiple primary tumors and the limitations of different tests. © 2024 The Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland.

Efficacy of pembrolizumab and biomarker analysis in patients with WGS-based intermediate to high tumor mutational load: results from the Drug Rediscovery Protocol.

PURPOSE: To evaluate efficacy of pembrolizumab across multiple cancer types harboring different levels of Whole-Genome Sequencing (WGS)-based tumor mutational load (TML; total of non-synonymous mutations across the genome) in patients included in the Drug Rediscovery Protocol (NCT02925234). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with solid, treatment-refractory, microsatellite-stable tumors were enrolled in cohort A: breast cancer TML 140-290, cohort B: tumor-agnostic cohort TML 140-290, and cohort C: tumor-agnostic cohort TML >290. Patients received pembrolizumab 200 mg every three weeks. Primary endpoint was clinical benefit (CB: objective response or stable disease (SD) ≥16 weeks). Pre-treatment tumor biopsies were obtained for WGS and RNA-sequencing. RESULTS: Seventy-two evaluable patients with 26 different histotypes were enrolled. CB rate was 13% in cohort A (3/24 with partial response (PR)), 21% in cohort B (3/24 with SD, 2/24 with PR), and 42% in cohort C (4/24 with SD, 6/24 with PR). In cohort C, neoantigen burden estimates and expression of inflammation and innate immune biomarkers were significantly associated with CB. Similar associations were not identified in cohort A and B. In cohort A, CB was significantly associated with mutations in the chromatin remodeling gene PBRM1, while in cohort B, CB was significantly associated with expression of MICA/MICB and butyrophilins. CB and clonal TML were not significantly associated. CONCLUSION: While in cohort A pembrolizumab lacked activity, cohort B and cohort C met the study's primary endpoint. Further research is warranted to refine selection of patients with tumors harboring lower TMLs and may benefit from a focus on innate immunity.

Patients with Rare Cancers in the Drug Rediscovery Protocol (DRUP) Benefit from Genomics-Guided Treatment.

PURPOSE: Patients with rare cancers (incidence less than 6 cases per 100,000 persons per year) commonly have less treatment opportunities and are understudied at the level of genomic targets. We hypothesized that patients with rare cancer benefit from approved anticancer drugs outside their label similar to common cancers. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: In the Drug Rediscovery Protocol (DRUP), patients with therapy-refractory metastatic cancers harboring an actionable molecular profile are matched to FDA/European Medicines Agency-approved targeted therapy or immunotherapy. Patients are enrolled in parallel cohorts based on the histologic tumor type, molecular profile and study drug. Primary endpoint is clinical benefit (complete response, partial response, stable disease ≥ 16 weeks). RESULTS: Of 1,145 submitted cases, 500 patients, including 164 patients with rare cancers, started one of the 25 available drugs and were evaluable for treatment outcome. The overall clinical benefit rate was 33% in both the rare cancer and nonrare cancer subgroup. Inactivating alterations of CDKN2A and activating BRAF aberrations were overrepresented in patients with rare cancer compared with nonrare cancers, resulting in more matches to CDK4/6 inhibitors (14% vs. 4%; P ≤ 0.001) or BRAF inhibitors (9% vs. 1%; P ≤ 0.001). Patients with rare cancer treated with small-molecule inhibitors targeting BRAF experienced higher rates of clinical benefit (75%) than the nonrare cancer subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: Comprehensive molecular testing in patients with rare cancers may identify treatment opportunities and clinical benefit similar to patients with common cancers. Our findings highlight the importance of access to broad molecular diagnostics to ensure equal treatment opportunities for all patients with cancer.