Association between baseline body mass index and survival in men with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer: ECOG-ACRIN CHAARTED E3805.

BACKGROUND: E3805 (CHAARTED) is a phase 3 trial demonstrating improved survival for men with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) randomized to treatment with docetaxel (D) and androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) versus ADT alone. We assessed the association of baseline body mass index (BMI) and metformin exposure with quality of life (QOL) and prostate cancer outcomes including survival in patients enrolled in the CHAARTED study. METHODS: We performed a posthoc exploratory analysis of the CHAARTED trial of men with mHSPC randomized to treatment with ADT with or without D between 2006 and 2012. Cox proportional hazards models and Kruskal-Wallis test were used to evaluate the association between BMI with QOL and prostate cancer outcomes and between metformin exposure and survival. RESULTS: In 788 of 790 enrolled patients with prospectively recorded baseline BMI and metformin exposure status, lower BMI was not associated with survival, but was associated with high volume disease (p < 0.0001) and poorer baseline QOL on functional assessment of cancer therapy-prostate (p = 0.008). Only 68 patients had prevalent metformin exposure at baseline in the CHAARTED trial. Four groups were identified: ADT + D + metformin (n = 39); ADT + D (n = 357); ADT + metformin (n = 29); and ADT alone (n = 363). Baseline clinicopathologic characteristics were similar between groups. In this small exploratory multivariable analysis, metformin exposure was not associated with survival (hazard ratio: 1.15; 95% confidence interval: 0.81-1.63, p = 0.44). CONCLUSIONS: There was no link between baseline BMI and survival, but lower baseline BMI was associated with features of greater cancer burden and poorer QOL.

Vorolanib (X-82), an oral anti-VEGFR/PDGFR/CSF1R tyrosine kinase inhibitor, with everolimus in solid tumors: results of a phase I study.

Background Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) combined with mTOR inhibitors, like everolimus, result in significant responses and prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) among patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) [1]. However, everolimus doses >5 mg are often not tolerated when combined with other TKIs2,3. Vorolanib (X-82), an oral anti-VEGFR/platelet derived growth factor receptor (PDGFR)/colony stimulating factor 1 receptor (CSF1R) multitarget TKI, has a short half-life and limited tissue accumulation. We conducted a Phase 1 study of vorolanib with everolimus (10 mg daily) in patients with solid tumors. Methods A 3 + 3 dose escalation design was utilized to determine dose limiting toxicities (DLT) and recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D) of vorolanib/everolimus. Oral vorolanib at 100, 150, 200, 300, or 400 mg was combined with 10 mg oral everolimus daily. The phase 2 portion was terminated after enrolling two patients due to funding. Results Eighteen patients were evaluable for DLT among 22 treated subjects. Observed DLTs were grade 3 fatigue, hypophosphatemia, and mucositis. The RP2D is vorolanib 300 mg with everolimus 10 mg daily. In 15 patients evaluable for response, three had partial response (PR; 2 RCC, 1 neuroendocrine tumor [NET]) and eight had stable disease (SD; 2 RCC, 6 NET). Conclusions Vorolanib can safely be combined with everolimus. Encouraging activity is seen in RCC and NET. Further studies are warranted. Trial Registration Number: NCT01784861.

Pemphigus foliaceus in a patient with gastrointestinal stromal tumor treated with adjuvant imatinib mesylate.

Pemphigus is an autoimmune bullous disease with a number of described associations, including medications, which have been grouped into three structural categories - thiol drugs, phenol drugs, and drugs with neither functional group [1]. Discontinuation of the offending medication is considered a mainstay of therapy. We report a patient in whom the onset of pemphigus foliaceus was associated with initiation of imatinib mesylate adjuvant therapy in a patient with resected gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST). Imatinib was continued because of the survival benefit to the patient with a resected, high risk GIST. Treatment with rituximab resulted in near resolution of his blistering rash and follow up enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) demonstrated reference range immunoreactivity for both desmoglein 1 and desmoglein 3. After dose increase of imatinib therapy owing to tumor growth, the patient subsequently again developed a similar eruption. Re-biopsy and ELISA were consistent with recurrence of pemphigus. In conclusion, although the patient's pemphigus was cleared with a single cycle of rituximab infusions while continuing imatinib therapy, the disease returned after imatinib dose was increased a year later, suggesting a dose-response relationship.

Mocetinostat for patients with previously treated, locally advanced/metastatic urothelial carcinoma and inactivating alterations of acetyltransferase genes.

BACKGROUND: The authors evaluated mocetinostat (a class I/IV histone deacetylase inhibitor) in patients with urothelial carcinoma harboring inactivating mutations or deletions in CREB binding protein [CREBBP] and/or E1A binding protein p300 [EP300] histone acetyltransferase genes in a single-arm, open-label phase 2 study. METHODS: Eligible patients with platinum-treated, advanced/metastatic disease received oral mocetinostat (at a dose of 70 mg 3 times per week [TIW] escalating to 90 mg TIW) in 28-day cycles in a 3-stage study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02236195). The primary endpoint was the objective response rate. RESULTS: Genomic testing was feasible in 155 of 175 patients (89%). Qualifying tumor mutations were CREBBP (15%), EP300 (8%), and both CREBBP and EP300 (1%). A total of 17 patients were enrolled into stage 1 (the intent-to-treat population); no patients were enrolled in subsequent stages. One partial response was observed (11% [1 of 9 patients; the population that was evaluable for efficacy comprised 9 of the 15 planned patients]); activity was deemed insufficient to progress to stage 2 (null hypothesis: objective response rate of ≤15%). All patients experienced ≥1 adverse event, most commonly nausea (13 of 17 patients; 77%) and fatigue (12 of 17 patients; 71%). The median duration of treatment was 46 days; treatment interruptions (14 of 17 patients; 82%) and dose reductions (5 of 17 patients; 29%) were common. Mocetinostat exposure was lower than anticipated (dose-normalized maximum serum concentration [Cmax ] after TIW dosing of 0.2 ng/mL/mg). CONCLUSIONS: To the authors' knowledge, the current study represents the first clinical trial using genomic-based selection to identify patients with urothelial cancer who are likely to benefit from selective histone deacetylase inhibition. Mocetinostat was associated with significant toxicities that impacted drug exposure and may have contributed to modest clinical activity in these pretreated patients. The efficacy observed was considered insufficient to warrant further investigation of mocetinostat as a single agent in this setting.

Cabozantinib Versus Sunitinib for Untreated Patients with Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma of Intermediate or Poor Risk: Subgroup Analysis of the Alliance A031203 CABOSUN trial.

Cabozantinib treatment prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) and improved objective response rate (ORR) compared with sunitinib in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) of intermediate or poor risk by International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) criteria in the phase II CABOSUN trial (NCT01835158). In the trial, 157 patients were randomized 1:1 to receive cabozantinib or sunitinib, stratified by IMDC risk group and presence of bone metastases. Here, PFS and ORR, both determined by independent radiology committee (IRC), were analyzed by subgroups of baseline characteristics. Cabozantinib treatment was generally associated with improved PFS and ORR versus sunitinib across subgroups, including in groups defined by IMDC risk group, bone metastases, age, and tumor burden. Clinical trial identification number NCT01835158.

Testicular Cancer, Version 2.2020, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

Testicular cancer is relatively uncommon and accounts for <1% of all male tumors. However, it is the most common solid tumor in men between the ages of 20 and 34 years, and the global incidence has been steadily rising over the past several decades. Several risk factors for testicular cancer have been identified, including personal or family history of testicular cancer and cryptorchidism. Testicular germ cell tumors (GCTs) comprise 95% of malignant tumors arising in the testes and are categorized into 2 main histologic subtypes: seminoma and nonseminoma. Although nonseminoma is the more clinically aggressive tumor subtype, 5-year survival rates exceed 70% with current treatment options, even in patients with advanced or metastatic disease. Radical inguinal orchiectomy is the primary treatment for most patients with testicular GCTs. Postorchiectomy management is dictated by stage, histology, and risk classification; treatment options for nonseminoma include surveillance, systemic therapy, and nerve-sparing retroperitoneal lymph node dissection. Although rarely occurring, prognosis for patients with brain metastases remains poor, with >50% of patients dying within 1 year of diagnosis. This selection from the NCCN Guidelines for Testicular Cancer focuses on recommendations for the management of adult patients with nonseminomatous GCTs.

Apatorsen plus docetaxel versus docetaxel alone in platinum-resistant metastatic urothelial carcinoma (Borealis-2).

BACKGROUND: A randomised study to assess the addition of apatorsen, an antisense oligonucleotide that inhibits Hsp27 expression, to docetaxel in patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) relapsed after prior platinum-based chemotherapy. METHODS: Multicentre, phase II study with 1:1 randomisation to apatorsen (three loading doses at 600 mg intravenous followed by weekly doses) plus docetaxel (75 mg/m2 intravenous every 21 days) (A/D) or docetaxel alone. Overall survival (OS) was the primary end point with a P value <0.1 (one-sided) being positive. Progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), safety, and effect of Hsp27 levels on outcomes were secondary end points. RESULTS: Patients randomised to A/D (n = 99) had improved OS compared to docetaxel alone (n = 101): HR: 0.80, 80% CI: 0.65-0.98, P = 0.0784, median 6.4 vs 5.9 months. PFS and ORR were similar in both arms. A/D had more incidence of sepsis and urinary tract infections. Patients with baseline Hsp27 levels <5.7 ng/mL had improved OS compared to those with levels ≥5.7 ng/mL. Patients with a decline or ≤20.5% increase in Hsp27 from baseline benefited more from A/D than those with >20.5% increase. CONCLUSIONS: A/D met its predefined OS end point in patients with platinum-refractory mUC in this phase II trial. This trial is hypothesis generating requiring further study before informing practice.

Chemohormonal Therapy in Metastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) has been the backbone of treatment for metastatic prostate cancer since the 1940s. We assessed whether concomitant treatment with ADT plus docetaxel would result in longer overall survival than that with ADT alone. METHODS: We assigned men with metastatic, hormone-sensitive prostate cancer to receive either ADT plus docetaxel (at a dose of 75 mg per square meter of body-surface area every 3 weeks for six cycles) or ADT alone. The primary objective was to test the hypothesis that the median overall survival would be 33.3% longer among patients receiving docetaxel added to ADT early during therapy than among patients receiving ADT alone. RESULTS: A total of 790 patients (median age, 63 years) underwent randomization. After a median follow-up of 28.9 months, the median overall survival was 13.6 months longer with ADT plus docetaxel (combination therapy) than with ADT alone (57.6 months vs. 44.0 months; hazard ratio for death in the combination group, 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.47 to 0.80; P<0.001). The median time to biochemical, symptomatic, or radiographic progression was 20.2 months in the combination group, as compared with 11.7 months in the ADT-alone group (hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.72; P<0.001). The rate of a prostate-specific antigen level of less than 0.2 ng per milliliter at 12 months was 27.7% in the combination group versus 16.8% in the ADT-alone group (P<0.001). In the combination group, the rate of grade 3 or 4 febrile neutropenia was 6.2%, the rate of grade 3 or 4 infection with neutropenia was 2.3%, and the rate of grade 3 sensory neuropathy and of grade 3 motor neuropathy was 0.5%. CONCLUSIONS: Six cycles of docetaxel at the beginning of ADT for metastatic prostate cancer resulted in significantly longer overall survival than that with ADT alone. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00309985.).

Everolimus versus sunitinib for patients with metastatic non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ASPEN): a multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Non-clear cell renal cell carcinomas are histologically and genetically diverse kidney cancers with variable prognoses, and their optimum initial treatment is unknown. We aimed to compare the mTOR inhibitor everolimus and the VEGF receptor inhibitor sunitinib in patients with non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma. METHODS: We enrolled patients with metastatic papillary, chromophobe, or unclassified non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma with no history of previous systemic treatment. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive everolimus (10 mg/day) or sunitinib (50 mg/day; 6-week cycles of 4 weeks with treatment followed by 2 weeks without treatment) administered orally until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Randomisation was stratified by Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center risk group and papillary histology. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population using the RECIST 1.1 criteria. Safety was assessed in all patients who were randomly assigned to treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01108445. FINDINGS: Between Sept 23, 2010, and Oct 28, 2013, 108 patients were randomly assigned to receive either sunitinib (n=51) or everolimus (n=57). As of December, 2014, 87 progression-free survival events had occurred with two remaining active patients, and the trial was closed for the primary analysis. Sunitinib significantly increased progression-free survival compared with everolimus (8·3 months [80% CI 5·8-11·4] vs 5·6 months [5·5-6·0]; hazard ratio 1·41 [80% CI 1·03-1·92]; p=0·16), although heterogeneity of the treatment effect was noted on the basis of histological subtypes and prognostic risk groups. No unexpected toxic effects were reported, and the most common grade 3-4 adverse events were hypertension (12 [24%] of 51 patients in the sunitinib group vs one [2%] of 57 patients in the everolimus group), infection (six [12%] vs four [7%]), diarrhoea (five [10%] vs one [2%]), pneumonitis (none vs five [9%]), stomatitis (none vs five [9%]), and hand-foot syndrome (four [8%] vs none). INTERPRETATION: In patients with metastatic non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma, sunitinib improved progression-free survival compared with everolimus. Future trials of novel agents should account for heterogeneity in disease outcomes based on genetic, histological, and prognostic factors. FUNDING: Novartis and Pfizer.

Phase II study of fosaprepitant + 5HT3 receptor antagonist + dexamethasone in patients with germ cell tumors undergoing 5-day cisplatin-based chemotherapy: a Hoosier Cancer Research Network study.

PURPOSE: A phase III study adding aprepitant to a 5HT3 receptor antagonist (5HT3-RA) plus dexamethasone in germ cell tumor (GCT) patients treated with 5-day cisplatin combination chemotherapy demonstrated a significant improvement in complete response (CR) (J Clin Onc 30:3998-4003, 2012). Fosaprepitant has demonstrated non-inferiority compared to aprepitant in single-day cisplatin chemotherapy and is approved as a single-dose alternative. This single-arm phase II study is the first clinical trial evaluating fosaprepitant in patients receiving multi-day cisplatin regimen. METHODS: GCT patients receiving a 5-day cisplatin combination chemotherapy were enrolled. Fosaprepitant 150 mg was given IV on days 3 and 5. A 5HT3-RA days 1-5 (days 1, 3, and 5, if palonosetron) plus dexamethasone 20 mg days 1 and 2 and 4 mg po bid days 6, 7, and 8 was administered. Rescue antiemetics were allowed. The primary objective was to determine the CR rate-no emetic episodes or use of rescue medications. Accrual of 64 patients was planned with expected CR > 27 %. RESULTS: Sixty-five patients were enrolled of whom 54 were eligible for analysis. Median age was 33. Fifty-one patients received bleomycin, etoposide, and cisplatin (BEP) chemotherapy. CR was observed in 13 (24.1 %) patients (95 % Agresti-Coull binomial C.I. 14.5 %, 37.1 %). CONCLUSION: The data in this phase II study, in contrast to our prior phase III study, appears to indicate a lower CR rate with the substitution of fosaprepitant for aprepitant. It is unknown whether the substitution of fosaprepitant for aprepitant provides the same benefit in multi-day cisplatin that was achieved with single-day cisplatin. Trial registration Clinical trial information NCT01736917.

A phase II study of adjuvant gemcitabine plus docetaxel followed by concurrent chemoradation in resected pancreaticobiliary carcinoma.

OBJECTIVES: Adjuvant gemcitabine with or without chemoradiation is a standard therapeutic option for patients with resected pancreatic cancer. The feasibility and toxicity of gemcitabine with docetaxel before and after 5-fluorouracil (5FU)-based chemoradiation in the adjuvant pancreatic and biliary cancer setting were investigated. METHODS: After a curative-intent resection, eligible patients with pancreaticobiliary cancers were treated with two cycles of gemcitabine and docetaxel followed by 5FU-based chemoradiation. Four weeks after completing chemoradiation, two cycles of gemcitabine and docetaxel were administered. The primary endpoint was the incidence of severe toxicities. Secondary endpoints included disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Fifty patients with pancreaticobiliary cancers were enrolled. Twenty-nine patients had pancreatic cancer whereas 21 patients had biliary tract or ampullary cancers. There was one death as a result of pneumonia, and 15% of patients experienced grade 3 or greater non-haematological toxicities. The median DFS and OS for patients with pancreatic cancer were 9.6 and 17 months, respectively, and for those with resected biliary tract cancer were 12 and 23 months, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This combination of gemcitabine and docetaxel with chemoradiation is feasible and tolerable in the adjuvant setting. Future studies utilizing a different gemcitabine/taxane combination and schedule may be appropriate in the adjuvant treatment of both pancreatic cancer and biliary tumours.

Phase I Dose-Escalation Study of the Safety and Pharmacokinetics of AGS15E Monotherapy in Patients with Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Effective treatment of locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) remains an unmet need. Antibody-drug conjugates (ADC) providing targeted drug delivery have shown antitumor activity in this setting. AGS15E is an investigational ADC that delivers the cytotoxic drug monomethyl auristatin E to cells expressing SLITRK6, a UC-associated antigen. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a multicenter, single-arm, phase I dose-escalation and expansion trial of AGS15E in patients with mUC (NCT01963052). During dose escalation, AGS15E was administered intravenously at six levels (0.10, 0.25, 0.50, 0.75, 1.00, 1.25 mg/kg), employing a continual reassessment method to determine dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) and the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) for the dose-expansion cohort. The primary objective was to evaluate the safety and pharmacokinetics of AGS15E in patients with and without prior chemotherapy and with prior checkpoint inhibitor (CPI) therapy. Best overall response was also examined. RESULTS: Ninety-three patients were recruited, including 33 patients previously treated with CPI. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were fatigue (54.8%), nausea (37.6%), and decreased appetite (35.5%). Peripheral neuropathy and ocular toxicities occurred at doses of ≥0.75 mg/kg. AGS15E increased in a dose-proportional manner after single- and multiple-dose administration; accumulation was low. Five DLT occurred from 0.50 to 1.25 mg/kg. The RP2D was assessed at 1.00 mg/kg; the objective response rate (ORR) was 35.7% at this dose level. The ORR in the total population and CPI-exposed subgroup were 18.3% and 27.3%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: DLT with AGS15E were observed at 0.75, 1.00, and 1.25 mg/kg, with an RP2D of 1.00 mg/kg being determined.

PRESTO: A Phase III, Open-Label Study of Intensification of Androgen Blockade in Patients With High-Risk Biochemically Relapsed Castration-Sensitive Prostate Cancer (AFT-19).

PURPOSE: Patients with biochemically recurrent prostate cancer (BRPC) after radical prostatectomy and a short PSA doubling time are at risk for distant metastases. Apalutamide, an androgen receptor antagonist, and abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (AAP) prolong survival in the metastatic setting. We evaluated whether intensification of androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) improves outcomes in BRPC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: PRESTO is a randomized phase III, open-label trial in patients with BRPC and PSA doubling time ≤9 months (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03009981). Patients were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to receive a finite 52-week treatment course with ADT control, ADT + apalutamide, or ADT + apalutamide + AAP. The primary end point was PSA progression-free survival (PSA-PFS), defined as serum PSA >0.2 ng/mL after treatment completion. RESULTS: Five hundred three patients were enrolled. The median PSA was 1.8 ng/mL (IQR, 1.0-3.6). At the first planned interim analysis, both experimental arms significantly prolonged PSA-PFS compared with the control arm (median, 24.9 months for ADT + apalutamide v 20.3 months for ADT; hazard ratio [HR], 0.52 [95% CI, 0.35 to 0.77]; P = .00047; median, 26.0 months for ADT + apalutamide + AAP v 20.0 months for ADT; HR, 0.48 [95% CI, 0.32 to 0.71]; P = .00008). Median time to testosterone recovery did not differ across treatment arms. The most common grade ≥3 adverse event was hypertension (7.5%, 7.4%, and 18% in ADT, ADT + apalutamide, and ADT + apalutamide + AAP arms, respectively). CONCLUSION: Intensified AR blockade for a finite duration prolongs PSA-PFS with a manageable safety profile, without adversely affecting time to testosterone recovery. The addition of apalutamide to ADT should be considered in patients with high-risk BRPC.

A phase II study of UCN-01 in combination with irinotecan in patients with metastatic triple negative breast cancer.

Mutations in TP53 lead to a defective G1 checkpoint and the dependence on checkpoint kinase 1 (Chk1) for G2 or S phase arrest in response to DNA damage. In preclinical studies, Chk1 inhibition resulted in enhanced cytotoxicity of several chemotherapeutic agents. The high frequency of TP53 mutations in triple negative breast cancer (TNBC: negative for estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and HER2) make Chk1 an attractive therapeutic target. UCN-01, a non-selective Chk1 inhibitor, combined with irinotecan demonstrated activity in advanced TNBC in our Phase I study. The goal of this trial was to further evaluate this treatment in women with TNBC. Patients with metastatic TNBC previously treated with anthracyclines and taxanes received irinotecan (100-125 mg/m(2) IV days 1, 8, 15, 22) and UCN-01 (70 mg/m(2) IV day 2, 35 mg/m(2) day 23 and subsequent doses) every 42-day cycle. Peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) and tumor specimens were collected. Twenty five patients were enrolled. The overall response (complete response (CR) + partial response (PR)) rate was 4 %. The clinical benefit rate (CR + PR + stable disease ≥6 months) was 12 %. Since UCN-01 inhibits PDK1, phosphorylated ribosomal protein S6 (pS6) in PBMC was assessed. Although reduced 24 h post UCN-01, pS6 levels rose to baseline by day 8, indicating loss of UCN-01 bioavailability. Immunostains of γH2AX and pChk1(S296) on serial tumor biopsies from four patients demonstrated an induction of DNA damage and Chk1 activation following irinotecan. However, Chk1 inhibition by UCN-01 was not observed in all tumors. Most tumors were basal-like (69 %), and carried mutations in TP53 (53 %). Median overall survival in patients with TP53 mutant tumors was poor compared to wild type (5.5 vs. 20.3 months, p = 0.004). This regimen had limited activity in TNBC. Inconsistent Chk1 inhibition was likely due to the pharmacokinetics of UCN-01. TP53 mutations were associated with a poor prognosis in metastatic TNBC.

A phase I study of IMP321 and gemcitabine as the front-line therapy in patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

PURPOSE: This phase I study was conducted to determine the safety profile and maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of IMP321, a soluble lymphocyte activation gene-3 (LAG-3) Ig fusion protein and MHC Class II agonist, combined with gemcitabine in patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma were treated with gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m(2))(level 1), gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m(2)) plus IMP 321 at 0.5 mg (level 2) and 2.0 mg (level 3), respectively. Safety, toxicity, and immunological markers at baseline and post treatment were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 18 patients were enrolled to the study, and 17 were evaluable for toxicity. None of the 6 patients who received 0.5 mg IMP321 experienced IMP321-related adverse events. Of the 5 patients who received IMP321 at the 2 mg dose level, 1 experienced rash, 1 reported hot flashes and 2 had mild pain at the injection sites. No severe adverse events previously attributed to IMP321 were observed. No significant differences were observed when comparing pre- and post-treatment levels of monocytes (CD11b+CD14+), conventional dendritic cells (CD11c+) or T cell subsets (CD4, CD8). CONCLUSIONS: IMP321 in combination with gemcitabine is a well-tolerated regimen. IMP321 did not result in any severe adverse events. No incremental activity observed for the additional IMP 321 to gemcitabine at the dose levels evaluated, likely due to sub-optimal dosing. Immunological markers suggested that higher dose levels of IMP321 are needed for future clinical studies.

Phase I Study of Single-Agent Anti-Programmed Death-1 (MDX-1106) in Refractory Solid Tumors: Safety, Clinical Activity, Pharmacodynamics, and Immunologic Correlates.

PURPOSE: Programmed death-1 (PD-1), an inhibitory receptor expressed on activated T cells, may suppress antitumor immunity. This phase I study sought to determine the safety and tolerability of anti-PD-1 blockade in patients with treatment-refractory solid tumors and to preliminarily assess antitumor activity, pharmacodynamics, and immunologic correlates. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty-nine patients with advanced metastatic melanoma, colorectal cancer (CRC), castrate-resistant prostate cancer, non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), or renal cell carcinoma (RCC) received a single intravenous infusion of anti-PD-1 (MDX-1106) in dose-escalating six-patient cohorts at 0.3, 1, 3, or 10 mg/kg, followed by a 15-patient expansion cohort at 10 mg/kg. Patients with evidence of clinical benefit at 3 months were eligible for repeated therapy. RESULTS: Anti-PD-1 was well tolerated: one serious adverse event, inflammatory colitis, was observed in a patient with melanoma who received five doses at 1 mg/kg. One durable complete response (CRC) and two partial responses (PRs; melanoma, RCC) were seen. Two additional patients (melanoma, NSCLC) had significant lesional tumor regressions not meeting PR criteria. The serum half-life of anti-PD-1 was 12 to 20 days. However, pharmacodynamics indicated a sustained mean occupancy of > 70% of PD-1 molecules on circulating T cells ≥ 2 months following infusion, regardless of dose. In nine patients examined, tumor cell surface B7-H1 expression appeared to correlate with the likelihood of response to treatment. CONCLUSION: Blocking the PD-1 immune checkpoint with intermittent antibody dosing is well tolerated and associated with evidence of antitumor activity. Exploration of alternative dosing regimens and combinatorial therapies with vaccines, targeted therapies, and/or other checkpoint inhibitors is warranted.

A Phase 2 Study of Sitravatinib in Combination with Nivolumab in Patients with Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Checkpoint inhibitor therapy (CPI) has demonstrated survival benefits in urothelial carcinoma (UC); however, not all patients benefit from CPI due to resistance. Combining sitravatinib, a multitargeted receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor of TYRO3, AXL, and MERTK (TAM) receptors and VEGFR2, with CPI may improve antitumor responses. Our objective was to assess the efficacy and safety of sitravatinib plus nivolumab in patients with advanced/metastatic UC. METHODS: The 516-003 trial (NCT03606174) is an open-label, multicohort phase 2 study evaluating sitravatinib plus nivolumab in patients with advanced/metastatic UC enrolled in eight cohorts depending on prior treatment with CPI, platinum-based chemotherapy (PBC), or antibody-drug conjugate (ADC). Overall, 244 patients were enrolled and treated with sitravatinib plus nivolumab (median follow-up 14.1-38.2 mo). Sitravatinib (free-base capsules 120 mg once daily [QD] or malate capsule 100 mg QD) plus nivolumab (240 mg every 2 wk/480 mg every 4 wk intravenously). KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR; RECIST v1.1). The secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and safety. The Predictive probability design and confidence interval methods were used. Among patients previously treated with PBC, ORR, and median PFS were 32.1% and 3.9 mo in CPI-naïve patients (n = 53), 14.9% and 3.9 mo in CPI-refractory patients (n = 67), and 5.4% and 3.7 mo in CPI- and ADC-refractory patients (n = 56), respectively. Across all cohorts, grade 3 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 51.2% patients and grade 4 in 3.3%, with one treatment-related death (cardiac failure). Immune-related adverse events occurred in 50.4% patients. TRAEs led to sitravatinib/nivolumab discontinuation in 6.1% patients. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Sitravatinib plus nivolumab demonstrated a manageable safety profile but did not result in clinically meaningful ORRs in patients with advanced/metastatic UC in the eight cohorts studied. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this study, the combination of two anticancer drugs, sitravatinib and nivolumab, resulted in manageable side effects but no meaningful responses in patients with bladder cancer.

Phase 2 study of bevacizumab plus erlotinib in patients with advanced hepatocellular cancer.

BACKGROUND: Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) are rational targets for therapy in hepatocellular cancer (HCC). METHODS: Patients with histologically proven HCC and not amenable to curative or liver directed therapy were included in this 2-stage phase 2 trial. Eligibility included an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) of 0 or 1 and Child's Pugh score of A or B, and 1 prior systemic therapy. Patients received erlotinib 150 mg daily and bevacizumab 10 mg/kg on days 1 and 15 every 28 days. Objective tumor response was the primary end point. RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients with advanced HCC (median age, 60 years) were enrolled in this multi-institutional study. The proportion of patients with Child's A classification was 74%. One patient had a confirmed partial response and 11 (48%) achieved stable disease. Median time to disease progression was 3.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.8-7.1). Median survival time was 9.5 months (95% CI, 7.1-17.1). Grade 3 toxicities included rash, hypertension, fatigue, and diarrhea. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial, erlotinib combined with bevacizumab had minimal activity in patients with advanced HCC based on objective response and progression-free survival. The role of targeting EGFR and VEGF in HCC needs further evaluation in molecularly selected patients.

Efficacy of peripheral androgen blockade in prostate cancer patients with biochemical failure after definitive local therapy: results of Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) 9782.

BACKGROUND: The treatment for prostate cancer patients with biochemical failure after local therapy remains controversial. Peripheral androgen blockade using a combination of a 5-alpha reductase inhibitor and an antiandrogen may allow control of the prostate-specific antigen (PSA). Because testosterone levels are not suppressed, this approach may be associated with less morbidity than conventional gonadal androgen suppression. METHODS: All patients had undergone previous definitive local therapy and had evidence of a rising PSA >1ng/mL, with no evidence of recurrent disease. Patients received both finasteride, 5 mg orally per day, and flutamide, 250 mg orally 3× a day. Patients were followed for a PSA response and quality of life assessment. RESULTS: Ninety-nine of 101 accrued patients were eligible. A ≥80% PSA decline was seen in 96 (96%) patients. The median time to PSA progression was 85 months. With a median follow-up of 10 years, the median survival time had not been reached, and the 5-year overall survival rate was 87%. Toxicity was mild, with 18 patients stopping for toxicity; 15 had diarrhea, 4 had gynecomastia, and 3 had transaminase elevation. Baseline Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Prostate Module and Treatment Outcome Index scores decreased by 5 points each at 6 months after enrollment. CONCLUSIONS: The use of the finasteride/flutamide combination is feasible, and results in PSA declines of ≥80% in 96% of patients with serologic progression after definitive local therapy. There were no unexpected toxicities, and the change in quality of life was mild. Further evaluation of this or a similar regimen in a controlled clinical trial is warranted.

Phase II trial of erlotinib and docetaxel in advanced and refractory hepatocellular and biliary cancers: Hoosier Oncology Group GI06-101.

BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced hepatocellular (HCC) and biliary tract carcinomas (BTC) have poor prognosis. While the EGFR pathway is overactive in HCC and BTC, single agent anti-EGFR therapies confer modest activity. Preclinical data showed synergistic antiproliferative and proapoptotic effects between anti-EGFR therapies and taxanes. We conducted a phase I study of erlotinib and docetaxel in solid tumors, and noted good tolerability and sustained complete (5 years +) and partial responses in patients with HCC and BTC. This trial evaluated the efficacy of erlotinib with docetaxel in refractory hepatobiliary cancers. METHODS: Eligible patients were allowed to have two prior systemic therapies. Docetaxel 30 mg/m2 i.v. was administered on days 1, 8, 15, and erlotinib 150 mg was dosed orally on days 2-7, 9-14, 16-28 of each 28-day cycle. The primary endpoint was 16 weeks progression-free survival (PFS), and secondary endpoints included response, stable disease, and overall survival. Tumor samples were analyzed for KRAS gene mutations and E-cadherin expression by immunohistochemistry (IHC). Patients with BTC and HCC were accrued and assessed in separate strata for the efficacy endpoints, but for the two-stage initial design of the study, combined PFS was considered. A Simon optimal two-stage design tested the hypothesis that the 16-week PFS is ≤ 15% (clinically inactive) versus the alternative of ≥ 30% (warranting further study). RESULTS: Twenty-five patients, 14 with HCC and 11 with BTC, were enrolled. Common toxicities were rash (76%), diarrhea (56%), and fatigue (52%), mostly grade 1 or 2. No objective responses were seen. Seven BTC (64%) and 6 HCC patients (46%) had stable disease as best response, with a median duration of 16.1 weeks (95% CI 3.7-56.3) for BTC, and 17.6 weeks (95% CI 8.1-49.8) for HCC. The 16-week PFS was 64% for BTC (95% CI 29.7-84.5), and 38% for HCC (95% CI 14.1-62.8). Median overall survival was 5.7 and 6.7 months for BTC and HCC patients, respectively. BTC patients with grade ≥ 2 rash had higher median PFS (6.2 vs 2.2 months) and OS (14.2 vs. 4.2 months). HCC patients with negative/low E-cadherin expression had higher median PFS (6.7 vs. 2.1 months) and OS (14.5 vs. 4 months). CONCLUSION: Erlotinib with docetaxel met the 16-week PFS ≥ 30% endpoint, but overall survival was comparable to that seen with single-agent erlotinib. With the limitation of small numbers of patients, grade ≥ 2 rash (in BTC), and negative/low E-cadherin expression (HCC) were associated with higher PFS and OS. Discussion Refractory biliary tract and hepatocellular cancers are difficult to treat, and no chemotherapy or biologically targeted therapies have impacted survival. Based on preclinical synergism and prior phase I data, we conducted a multi-institutional study sequentially combining the EGFR-targeted agent erlotinib with docetaxel. Results from this study show that the primary endpoint, 16-week PFS of ≥ 30%, was met for the combined group of BTC and HCC patients (as originally planned in the study design), as well as in each disease category: 63.6% for BTC and 38.5% for HCC patients. Nevertheless, no patients attained an objective response and the median survival of 5.7 months for BTC, and 6.7 months for HCC patients (while heavily pretreated), is comparable to that seen with single-agent EGFR-targeted therapies. Safety analysis shows that this regimen was generally well tolerated, and most adverse events were grade 1 or 2. Few patients had reversible grade 3 transaminase elevation (8%), and severe anorexia, fatigue, and rash were uncommon. As expected, patients with grade ≥ 2 rash experienced higher PFS and OS, but this was noted only among the BTC group, likely because too few HCC patients had grade ≥ 2 rash. KRAS is an important predictive marker for anti-EGFR therapies for lung and colorectal cancers, but for HCC or the heterogeneous group of BTC (with 10-50% KRAS mutations) no significant correlations have been established. We were not able to identify a correlation between KRAS and benefit from erlotinib-based therapy, as all but one HCC patient had KRAS wild type gene status. Preclinical data in multiple tumor types showed that E-cadherin, a signature marker for an "epithelial" tumor phenotype when overexpressed, predicts EGFR pathway activation and determines sensitivity to EGFR-targeted agents. E-cadherin is often seen as a poor prognostic marker when downregulated, as noted during cancer progression. Not all studies demonstrate beneficial effects from E-cadherin overexpression, possibly due to histological expression variability or tumor type specificity for this biomarker. Six BTC and 8 HCC patients had evaluable tumor samples for E-cadherin analysis. While the numbers were small and conclusions should be viewed with caution, negative/low E-cadherin expression was associated with improved PFS and OS for hepatobiliary cancers (most significant in HCC) in this refractory patient population where we expected lower expression levels. In conclusion, the combination of erlotinib with docetaxel provided a 16-week PFS of ≥ 30% but showed no appreciable differences in overall survival from historical data with single-agent erlotinib. While EGFR represents an important target in this group of malignancies, it is clear that hepatobiliary cancers are heterogeneous, thus a meaningful improvement in survival most likely will require careful treatment selection based on patient tumor's molecular and genetic profiling.