Limited clinical activity of palbociclib and ribociclib monotherapy in advanced cancers with cyclin D-CDK4/6 pathway alterations in the Dutch DRUP and Australian MoST trials.

The Dutch Drug Rediscovery Protocol (DRUP) and the Australian Cancer Molecular Screening and Therapeutic (MoST) Program are similar nonrandomized, multidrug, pan-cancer trial platforms that aim to identify signals of clinical activity of molecularly matched targeted therapies or immunotherapies outside their approved indications. Here, we report results for advanced or metastatic cancer patients with tumors harboring cyclin D-CDK4/6 pathway alterations treated with CDK4/6 inhibitors palbociclib or ribociclib. We included adult patients that had therapy-refractory solid malignancies with the following alterations: amplifications of CDK4, CDK6, CCND1, CCND2 or CCND3, or complete loss of CDKN2A or SMARCA4. Within MoST, all patients were treated with palbociclib, whereas in DRUP, palbociclib and ribociclib were assigned to different cohorts (defined by tumor type and alteration). The primary endpoint for this combined analysis was clinical benefit, defined as confirmed objective response or stable disease ≥16 weeks. We treated 139 patients with a broad variety of tumor types; 116 with palbociclib and 23 with ribociclib. In 112 evaluable patients, the objective response rate was 0% and clinical benefit rate at 16 weeks was 15%. Median progression-free survival was 4 months (95% CI: 3-5 months), and median overall survival 5 months (95% CI: 4-6 months). In conclusion, only limited clinical activity of palbociclib and ribociclib monotherapy in patients with pretreated cancers harboring cyclin D-CDK4/6 pathway alterations was observed. Our findings indicate that monotherapy use of palbociclib or ribociclib is not recommended and that merging data of two similar precision oncology trials is feasible.

A signal-seeking Phase 2 study of olaparib and durvalumab in advanced solid cancers with homologous recombination repair gene alterations.

PURPOSE: To determine the safety and efficacy of PARP plus PD-L1 inhibition (olaparib + durvalumab, O + D) in patients with advanced solid, predominantly rare cancers harbouring homologous recombination repair (HRR) defects. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In total, 48 patients were treated with O + D, 16 with BRCA1/2 alterations (group 1) and 32 with other select HRR alterations (group 2). Overall, 32 (66%) patients had rare or less common cancers. The primary objective of this single-arm Phase II trial was a progression-free survival rate at 6 months (PFS6). Post hoc exploratory analyses were conducted on archival tumour tissue and serial bloods. RESULTS: The PFS6 rate was 35% and 38% with durable objective tumour responses (OTR) in 3(19%) and 3(9%) in groups 1 and 2, respectively. Rare cancers achieving an OTR included cholangiocarcinoma, perivascular epithelioid cell (PEComa), neuroendocrine, gallbladder and endometrial cancer. O + D was safe, with five serious adverse events related to the study drug(s) in 3 (6%) patients. A higher proportion of CD38 high B cells in the blood and higher CD40 expression in tumour was prognostic of survival. CONCLUSIONS: O + D demonstrated no new toxicity concerns and yielded a clinically meaningful PFS6 rate and durable OTRs across several cancers with HRR defects, including rare cancers.

MONARCC: a randomised phase II study of panitumumab monotherapy and panitumumab plus 5-fluorouracil as first-line therapy for RAS and BRAF wildtype metastatic colorectal cancer: a study by the Australasian Gastrointestinal Trials Group (AGITG).

BACKGROUND: Doublet chemotherapy in combination with a biologic agent has been a standard of care in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer for over a decade. The evidence for a "lighter" treatment approach is limited to mono-chemotherapy plus bevacizumab in the RAS unselected population. Anti-EGFR antibodies have activity as monotherapy or in combination with chemotherapy in RAS wildtype metastatic colorectal cancer; however their role in first-line treatment in combination with 5-fluorouracil monotherapy or when given alone has not been well studied. MONARCC aims to investigate this approach in an elderly population. METHODS/DESIGN: MONARCC is a prospective, open-label, multicentre, non-comparative randomised phase II trial. Eligible patients aged ≥70 with unresectable metastatic, untreated, RAS/BRAF wildtype metastatic colorectal cancer will be randomised 1:1 to receive panitumumab alone or panitumumab plus infusional 5-fluorouracil. RAS and BRAF analyses will be performed in local laboratories. Comprehensive Health Assessment and Limited Health Assessments will be performed at baseline and at 16 weeks, respectively, to assess frailty. The Patient Symptom Questionnaire and Overall Treatment Utility are to be undertaken at different timepoints to assess the impact of treatment-related toxicities and quality of life. Treatment will be delivered every 2 weeks until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity (as determined by treating clinician or patient), delay of treatment of more than 6 weeks, or withdrawal of consent. The primary end point is 6-month progression-free survival in both arms. Secondary end points include overall survival, time to treatment failure, objective tumour response rate as defined by RECIST v1.1 and safety (adverse events). Tertiary and correlative endpoints include the feasibility and utility of a comprehensive geriatric assessment, quality of life and biological substudies. DISCUSSION: MONARCC investigates the activity and tolerability of first-line panitumumab-based treatments with a view to expand on current treatment options while maximising progression-free and overall survival and quality of life in molecularly selected elderly patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12618000233224 , prospectively registered 14 February 2018.

Cancer Molecular Screening and Therapeutics (MoST): a framework for multiple, parallel signal-seeking studies of targeted therapies for rare and neglected cancers.

BACKGROUND: Precision medicine aims to link molecular targets in tumours with corresponding therapies, particularly for patients with rare cancers. Innovative approaches are needed to translate molecular opportunities into clinical care. The Cancer Molecular Screening and Therapeutics (MoST) program employs a molecular screening platform to identify molecular changes of therapeutic relevance (actionable changes) and a master protocol for multiple, parallel signal-seeking clinical substudies, focused on therapies for patients with rare and neglected cancers. Methods and analysis: Archival pathology laboratory samples from patients with treatment-refractory advanced solid cancer of any histologic type undergo molecular tumour profiling. Following review by a Molecular Tumour Board, eligible patients are offered treatment in therapeutic substudies. This novel master protocol allows expedited addition of individual substudies; at least 12 open label, single arm, signal-seeking substudies during the initial 4 years of MoST are planned. The primary objectives are to identify signals of efficacy for developing biomarker-driven therapies and biomarkers that more accurately predict response to therapy, as well as to evaluate the MoST design. Ethics approval: The program has been approved by the St Vincent's Hospital Sydney Human Research Ethics Committee (reference, HREC/16/SVH/23). Dissemination of results: A report summarising and interpreting collected study data will be published. Our findings will be presented at national and international conferences and scientific meetings, and published in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12616000908437 (8 July 2016).

ICECREAM: randomised phase II study of cetuximab alone or in combination with irinotecan in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer with either KRAS, NRAS, BRAF and PI3KCA wild type, or G13D mutated tumours.

BACKGROUND: Patients with metastatic colorectal cancer whose disease has progressed on oxaliplatin- and irinotecan-containing regimens may benefit from EGFR-inhibiting monoclonal antibodies if they do not contain mutations in the KRAS gene (are "wild type"). It is unknown whether these antibodies, such as cetuximab, are more efficacious in refractory metastatic colorectal cancer as monotherapy, or in combination with irinotecan. Lack of mutation in KRAS, BRAF and PIK3CA predicts response to EFGR-inhibitors. The ICECREAM trial examines the question of monotherapy versus combination with chemotherapy in two groups of patients: those with a "quadruple wild type" tumour genotype (no mutations in KRAS, NRAS, PI3KCA or BRAF genes) and those with the specific KRAS mutation in codon G13D, for whom possibly EGFR-inhibitor efficacy may be equivalent. METHODS AND DESIGN: ICECREAM is a randomised, phase II, open-label, controlled trial comparing the efficacy of cetuximab alone or with irinotecan in patients with "quadruple wild type" or G13D-mutated metastatic colorectal cancer, whose disease has progressed on, or who are intolerant of oxaliplatin- and fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy. The primary endpoint is the 6-month progression-free survival benefit of the treatment regimen. Secondary endpoints are response rate, overall survival, and quality of life. The tertiary endpoint is prediction of outcome with further biological markers. International collaboration has facilitated recruitment in this prospective trial of treatment in these infrequently found molecular subsets of colorectal cancer. DISCUSSION: This unique trial will yield prospective information on the efficacy of cetuximab and whether this is further enhanced with chemotherapy in two distinct populations of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: the "quadruple wild type", which may 'superselect' for tumours sensitive to EGFR-inhibition, and the rare KRAS G13D mutated tumours, which are also postulated to be sensitive to the drug. The focus on establishing both positive and negative predictive factors for the response to targeted therapy is an attempt to improve outcomes, reduce toxicity and contain treatment costs. Tissue and blood will yield a resource for molecular studies. Recruitment, particularly of patients with the rare G13D mutation, will demonstrate the ability for international collaboration to run prospective trials in small colorectal cancer molecular subgroups. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12612000901808 , registered 16 August 2012.

Topological barrier to Cas12a activation by circular DNA nanostructures facilitates autocatalysis and transforms DNA/RNA sensing.

Control of CRISPR/Cas12a trans-cleavage is crucial for biosensor development. Here, we show that small circular DNA nanostructures which partially match guide RNA sequences only minimally activate Cas12a ribonucleoproteins. However, linearizing these structures restores activation. Building on this finding, an Autocatalytic Cas12a Circular DNA Amplification Reaction (AutoCAR) system is established which allows a single nucleic acid target to activate multiple ribonucleoproteins, and greatly increases the achievable reporter cleavage rates per target. A rate-equation-based model explains the observed near-exponential rate trends. Autocatalysis is also sustained with DNA nanostructures modified with fluorophore-quencher pairs achieving 1 aM level (<1 copy/µL) DNA detection (106 times improvement), without additional amplification, within 15 min, at room temperature. The detection range is tuneable, spanning 3 to 11 orders of magnitude. We demonstrate 1 aM level detection of SNP mutations in circulating tumor DNA from blood plasma, genomic DNA (H. Pylori) and RNA (SARS-CoV-2) without reverse transcription as well as colorimetric lateral flow tests of cancer mutations with ~100 aM sensitivity.

Early circulating tumor DNA dynamics as a pan-tumor biomarker for long-term clinical outcome in patients treated with durvalumab and tremelimumab.

There is an urgent need to identify biomarkers of early response that can accurately predict the benefit of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). Patients receiving durvalumab/tremelimumab had tumor samples sequenced before treatment (baseline) to identify variants for the design of a personalized circulating tumor (ctDNA) assay. ctDNA was assessed at baseline and at 4 and/or 8 weeks into treatment. Correlations between ctDNA changes to radiographic response and overall survival (OS) were made to assess potential clinical benefit. 35/40 patients (87.5%) had personalized ctDNA assays designed, and 29/35 (82.9%) had plasma available for baseline analysis, representing 16 unique solid tumor histologies. As early as 4 weeks after treatment, decline in ctDNA from baseline predicted improved OS (P = 0.0144; HR = 9.98) and ctDNA changes on treatment-supported and refined radiographic response calls. ctDNA clearance at any time through week 8 identified complete responders by a median lead time of 11.5 months ahead of radiographic imaging. ctDNA response monitoring is emerging as a dynamic, personalized biomarker method that may predict survival outcomes in patients with diverse solid tumor histologies, complementing and sometimes preceding standard-of-care imaging assessments.

The experiences and needs of Australian medical oncologists in integrating comprehensive genomic profiling into clinical care: a nation-wide survey.

PURPOSE: Comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) is increasingly used to guide cancer therapy. This study aimed to characterise oncologists' experiences and needs when utilising genomic results. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An electronic survey distributed nation-wide to practising medical oncologists in Australia explored oncologists' experiences with consenting, interpreting and communicating CGP results to patients. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 108 of 333 oncologists (32%) and most respondents (n = 97, 90%) had referred patients for CGP. Using a 100-point visual analogue scale score [VAS], where higher values indicate greater confidence, most oncologists were confident consenting patients for referral [median 75 (Interquartile range, IQR: 53-85), discussing CGP results (median VAS: 70, IQR: 51-80), but significantly less confident discussing secondary germline findings (median VAS: 56, IQR 30-70, p < 0.001). Confidence with pursuing therapies based on CGP results increased with clinical experience (mean VAS increases by 4.8 per 5 years of experience, p < 0.001). Most oncologists (N = 68, 63%) reported wanting assistance with interpretation of CGP and patient-centric resources to aid communication with patients. CONCLUSIONS: Oncologists are integrating genomics into clinical care, but only display moderate confidence in communication and changing management accordingly. The development of patient- and clinician- targeted resources may assist with routine utilisation of CGP results in cancer care.

Criteria-based curation of a therapy-focused compendium to support treatment recommendations in precision oncology.

While several resources exist that interpret therapeutic significance of genomic alterations in cancer, many regional real-world issues limit access to drugs. There is a need for a pragmatic, evidence-based, context-adapted tool to guide clinical management based on molecular biomarkers. To this end, we have structured a compendium of approved and experimental therapies with associated biomarkers following a survey of drug regulatory databases, existing knowledge bases, and published literature. Each biomarker-disease-therapy triplet was categorised using a tiering system reflective of key therapeutic considerations: approved and reimbursed therapies with respect to a jurisdiction (Tier 1), evidence of efficacy or approval in another jurisdiction (Tier 2), evidence of antitumour activity (Tier 3), and plausible biological rationale (Tier 4). Two resistance categories were defined: lack of efficacy (Tier R1) or antitumor activity (Tier R2). Based on this framework, we curated a digital resource focused on drugs relevant in the Australian healthcare system (TOPOGRAPH: Therapy Oriented Precision Oncology Guidelines for Recommending Anticancer Pharmaceuticals). As of November 2020, TOPOGRAPH comprised 2810 biomarker-disease-therapy triplets in 989 expert-appraised entries, including 373 therapies, 199 biomarkers, and 106 cancer types. In the 345 therapies catalogued, 84 (24%) and 65 (19%) were designated Tiers 1 and 2, respectively, while 271 (79%) therapies were supported by preclinical studies, early clinical trials, retrospective studies, or case series (Tiers 3 and 4). A companion algorithm was also developed to support rational, context-appropriate treatment selection informed by molecular biomarkers. This framework can be readily adapted to build similar resources in other jurisdictions to support therapeutic decision-making.

Author Correction: Therapeutic implications of germline genetic findings in cancer.

The originally published article contained errors in the main text and in figure 1 in the reported number of patients with pathogenic or likely pathogenic germline variants. The originally reported numbers did not take into account the presence of more than one variant in an individual patient. This has been corrected in the HTML and PDF versions of the manuscript.

Therapeutic implications of germline genetic findings in cancer.

Cancer is a genetic disease. To date, translational cancer genomics has focused largely on somatic alterations, driven by the desire to identify targets for personalized therapy. However, therapeutically relevant information is also latent within the germline genome. In addition to cancer susceptibility, alterations present in the germ line can determine responses to both targeted and more traditional anticancer therapies, as well as their toxicities. Despite the importance of these alterations, many algorithms designed to analyse somatic mutations conversely continue to subtract information on germline genetics during analysis. In the light of low actionable yields from somatic tumour testing, a need exists for diversification of the sources of potential therapeutic biomarkers. In this Review, we summarize the literature on the therapeutic potential of alterations in the germline genome. The therapeutic value of germline information will not only be manifest as improvements in treatment but will also drive greater levels of engagement and cooperation between traditional oncology services and familial risk management clinics.

Cetuximab Alone or With Irinotecan for Resistant KRAS-, NRAS-, BRAF- and PIK3CA-wild-type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: The AGITG Randomized Phase II ICECREAM Study.

BACKGROUND: The Irinotecan Cetuximab Evaluation and Cetuximab Response Evaluation (ICECREAM) study assessed the efficacy of cetuximab monotherapy compared with cetuximab combined with chemotherapy for quadruple wild-type (KRAS, NRAS, BRAF, or P13KCA exon 20) metastatic colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were enrolled in an open-label, multicenter, phase II trial and randomly assigned to cetuximab 400 mg/m2, then 250 mg/m2 cetuximab weekly, with or without irinotecan 180 mg/m2 every 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was 6-month progression-free survival; secondary endpoints were response rate, overall survival, toxicity, and quality of life. RESULTS: From 2012 to 2016, 48 patients were recruited. Two were ineligible, and 2 were not evaluable for response. Characteristics were balanced, except gender (male, 62% vs. 72%) and primary sidedness (left, 95% vs. 68%). For cetuximab compared with cetuximab-irinotecan, progression-free survival was 14% versus 41% (hazard ratio, 0.39; 95% confidence interval, 0.20-0.78; P = .008); response rate was 10% (2 partial responses) versus 38% (1 complete, 8 partial); P = .04. Grade 3 to 4 toxicities were less with cetuximab monotherapy (23% vs. 50%); global and specific quality of life scores did not differ. CONCLUSION: In comparison with cetuximab alone, cetuximab plus irinotecan increases the response rate and delays progression in irinotecan-resistant RAS wild-type colorectal cancer. This echoes data from molecularly unselected patients.

Evaluating the addition of oxaliplatin to single agent fluoropyrimidine in the treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Multimodality treatment of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) has significantly improved local disease control, however the unaltered overall survival (OS) implicates an inability to further control micrometastases, providing rationale for intensified systemic treatment. A systematic review was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of adding oxaliplatin to a fluoropyrimidine (intervention) compared with fluoropyrimidine alone (control) in the treatment of LARC. METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, Medline Ovid, PubMed and EMBASE databases. Randomised trials comparing the intervention and control delivered either pre- or post-operatively were included. RESULTS: Seven trials involving 4444 patients were identified; five studies evaluated the intervention vs control preoperatively; one study peri-operatively; and one, post-operatively. There was no significant difference in OS with oxaliplatin addition, HR 0.89, 95% CI, 0.75 to 1.06. There was however an improvement in disease free survival, 3-year local and distant recurrence rates (RR) favouring oxaliplatin. Preoperative oxaliplatin improved pathological complete response (pCR), but with a greater toxicity and reduced compliance with radiation. CONCLUSION: There is no OS benefit with oxaliplatin, despite improved pCR, local and distant RR. Before drawing definitive conclusions, longer follow-up in included trials and availability of published data from other eligible studies, including the induction setting, are needed.

Optimal therapy for resectable rectal cancer.

A lot can be gained by improving our understanding of the optimal sequence of existing therapies in rectal cancer, with the more difficult task of balancing the morbidity of recurrence with the morbidity of prescribed therapies that are particularly toxic owing to tumour location. This review aims to highlight a recent shift in treatment strategies in the opposite direction, with a focus on earlier, more intense systemic treatments with reduced local therapies. Understanding the rationale for and evidence to support this shift will help identify gaps, shape future trials, and ultimately answer the question of whether this is indeed the right path to follow with regards to maintaining local control rates and long-term outcomes for patients, and improving distal disease control and local treatment-related morbidities without compromising quality of life.

Update on optimal treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer from the ACTG/AGITG expert meeting: ECCO 2015.

The treatment of metastatic CRC (mCRC) has evolved over the last 20 years, from fluoropyrimidines alone to combination chemotherapy and new biologic agents. Median overall survival is now over 24 months for RAS mutated (MT) patients and over 30 months for RAS wild-type (WT) patients. However, there are subgroups of patients with BRAF V600E MT CRC who have a significantly poorer outlook. Newer treatment options are also being explored in select subgroups of patients (anti-HER 2 in HER2 positive mCRC and immunotherapy in patients with defective mismatch repair (dMMR)). The best use of these systemic treatment options, as well as surgery in well-selected patients requires careful consideration of predictive biomarkers and importantly, the optimal sequence in which therapies should be given to derive maximal benefit. A group of colorectal subspecialty medical oncologists from Australia, USA, The Netherlands and Germany met during ECCO 2015 in Vienna to review current practice.

Response to Cetuximab With or Without Irinotecan in Patients With Refractory Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Harboring the KRAS G13D Mutation: Australasian Gastro-Intestinal Trials Group ICECREAM Study.

PURPOSE: RAS mutations predict lack of response to epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibody therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), but preclinical studies and retrospective clinical data suggest that patients with tumors harboring the exon 2 KRAS G13D mutation may benefit from cetuximab. We aimed to assess cetuximab monotherapy and cetuximab plus irinotecan in patients with molecularly selected (G13D mutation) chemotherapy-refractory mCRC in a randomized phase II trial of this rare molecular subtype. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with chemotherapy-refractory KRAS G13D mutation-positive mCRC who had progressed within 6 months of irinotecan therapy were randomly assigned to cetuximab 400 mg/m(2) loading dose and then 250 mg/m(2) once per week with or without irinotecan 180 mg/m(2) once every 2 weeks. The primary end point was 6-month progression-free survival; secondary end points were response rate, overall survival, quality of life, and toxicity. RESULTS: Fifty-one of 53 patients recruited over 2 years were eligible. The 6-month progression-free survival rate was 10% (95% CI, 2% to 26%) for cetuximab versus 23% (95% CI, 9% to 40%) for cetuximab plus irinotecan with a hazard ratio of 0.74 (95% CI, 0.42 to 1.32). Response and stable disease rates were 0% and 58% for monotherapy versus 9% and 70% for combination treatment, respectively. Overall survival and quality of life were similar; toxicities were higher with combination therapy. CONCLUSION: In patients with G13D-mutated chemotherapy-refractory mCRC, there was no statistically significant improvement in disease control at 6 months with either cetuximab monotherapy or cetuximab plus irinotecan. No responses were seen with single-agent cetuximab. The responses observed with the combination of cetuximab and irinotecan may reflect true drug synergy or persistent irinotecan sensitivity. The ICECREAM (Irinotecan Cetuximab Evaluation and Cetuximab Response Evaluation Among Patients with a G13D Mutation) study demonstrates the need to prospectively evaluate hypotheses that were previously supported by retrospective analyses and exemplifies the value of international collaboration in trials of rare molecular subtypes.