Phase II study of vemurafenib in children and young adults with tumors harboring BRAF V600 mutations: NCI-COG pediatric MATCH trial (APEC1621) Arm G.

BACKGROUND: This is a phase II subprotocol of the NCI-COG Pediatric MATCH study evaluating vemurafenib, a selective oral inhibitor of BRAF V600 mutated kinase, in patients with relapsed or refractory solid tumors harboring BRAF V600 mutations. METHODS: Patients received vemurafenib at 550 mg/m2 (maximum 960 mg/dose) orally twice daily for 28-day cycles until progression or intolerable toxicity. The primary aim was to determine the objective response rate and secondary objectives included estimating progression-free survival and assessing the tolerability of vemurafenib. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients matched to the subprotocol and 4 patients (18%) enrolled. Primary reasons for non-enrollment were ineligibility due to exclusions of low-grade glioma (nâ=â7) and prior BRAF inhibitor therapy (nâ=â7). Enrolled diagnoses were one each of histiocytosis, ameloblastoma, Ewing sarcoma, and high-grade glioma, all with BRAF V600E mutations. Treatment was overall tolerable with mostly expected grade 1/2 adverse events (AE). Grade 3 or 4 AE on treatment were acute kidney injury, hyperglycemia, and maculopapular rash. One patient came off therapy due to AE. One patient (glioma) had an objective partial response and remained on protocol therapy for 15 cycles. CONCLUSION: There was a low accrual rate on this MATCH subprotocol, with only 18% of those who matched with BRAFV600 mutations enrolling, resulting in early termination, and limiting study results (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03220035).

Olaparib for childhood tumors harboring defects in DNA damage repair genes: arm H of the NCI-COG Pediatric MATCH trial.

BACKGROUND: The National Cancer Institute-Children's Oncology Group Pediatric Molecular Analysis for Therapy Choice (MATCH) precision oncology platform trial enrolled children aged 1-21 years with treatment-refractory solid tumors and predefined actionable genetic alterations. Patients with tumors harboring alterations in DNA damage repair (DDR) genes were assigned to receive olaparib. METHODS: Tumor and blood samples were submitted for centralized molecular testing. Tumor and germline sequencing were conducted in parallel. Olaparib was given twice daily for 28-day cycles starting at a dose 30% lower than the adult recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D). The primary endpoint was the objective response. RESULTS: Eighteen patients matched (1.5% of those screened) based on the presence of a deleterious gene alteration in BRCA1/2, RAD51C/D, or ATM detected by tumor sequencing without germline subtraction or analysis of loss of heterozygosity (LOH). Eleven (61%) harbored a germline mutation, with only one exhibiting LOH. Six patients enrolled and received the olaparib starting dose of 135 mg/m2/dose. Two participants were fully evaluable; 4 were inevaluable because <85% of the prescribed dose was administered during cycle 1. There were no dose-limiting toxicities or responses. Minimal hematologic toxicity was observed. CONCLUSION: Most DDR gene alterations detected in Pediatric MATCH were germline, monoallelic, and unlikely to confer homologous recombination deficiency predicting sensitivity to olaparib monotherapy. The study closed due to poor accrual. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT03233204. IRB approved: initial July 24, 2017.

Criteria for the use of omics-based predictors in clinical trials.

The US National Cancer Institute (NCI), in collaboration with scientists representing multiple areas of expertise relevant to 'omics'-based test development, has developed a checklist of criteria that can be used to determine the readiness of omics-based tests for guiding patient care in clinical trials. The checklist criteria cover issues relating to specimens, assays, mathematical modelling, clinical trial design, and ethical, legal and regulatory aspects. Funding bodies and journals are encouraged to consider the checklist, which they may find useful for assessing study quality and evidence strength. The checklist will be used to evaluate proposals for NCI-sponsored clinical trials in which omics tests will be used to guide therapy.

A mutational comparison of adult and adolescent and young adult (AYA) colon cancer.

BACKGROUND: It is possible that the relative lack of progress in treatment outcomes among adolescent and young adult (AYA) patients with cancer is caused by a difference in disease biology compared with the corresponding diseases in younger and older individuals. There is evidence that colon cancer is more aggressive and has a poorer prognosis in AYA patients than in older adult patients. METHODS: To further understand the molecular basis for this difference, whole-exome sequencing was conducted on a cohort of 30 adult, 30 AYA, and 2 pediatric colon cancers. RESULTS: A statistically significant difference in mutational frequency was observed between AYA and adult samples in 43 genes, including ROBO1, MYC binding protein 2 (MYCBP2), breast cancer 2 (early onset) (BRCA2), MAP3K3, MCPH1, RASGRP3, PTCH1, RAD9B, CTNND1, ATM, NF1; KIT, PTEN, and FBXW7. Many of these mutations were nonsynonymous, missense, stop-gain, or frameshift mutations that were damaging. Next, RNA sequencing was performed on a subset of the samples to confirm the mutations identified by exome sequencing. This confirmation study verified the presence of a significantly greater frequency of damaging mutations in AYA compared with adult colon cancers for 5 of the 43 genes (MYCBP2, BRCA2, PHLPP1, TOPORS, and ATR). CONCLUSIONS: The current results provide the rationale for a more comprehensive study with a larger sample set and experimental validation of the functional impact of the identified variants along with their contribution to the biologic and clinical characteristics of AYA colon cancer. Cancer 2018;124:1070-82. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Next steps for adolescent and young adult oncology workshop: An update on progress and recommendations for the future.

Each year, 70,000 adolescents and young adults (AYAs) between ages 15 and 39 years in the United States are diagnosed with cancer. In 2006, a National Cancer Institute (NCI) Progress Review Group (PRG) examined the state of science associated with cancer among AYAs. To assess the impact of the PRG and examine the current state of AYA oncology research, the NCI, with support from the LIVESTRONG Foundation, sponsored a workshop entitled "Next Steps in Adolescent and Young Adult Oncology" on September 16 and 17, 2013, in Bethesda, Maryland. This report summarizes the findings from the workshop, opportunities to leverage existing data, and suggestions for future research priorities. Multidisciplinary teams that include basic scientists, epidemiologists, trialists, biostatisticians, clinicians, behavioral scientists, and health services researchers will be essential for future advances for AYAs with cancer.

Biologic and clinical characteristics of adolescent and young adult cancers: Acute lymphoblastic leukemia, colorectal cancer, breast cancer, melanoma, and sarcoma.

Adolescent and young adult (AYA) patients with cancer have not attained the same improvements in overall survival as either younger children or older adults. One possible reason for this disparity may be that the AYA cancers exhibit unique biologic characteristics, resulting in differences in clinical and treatment resistance behaviors. This report from the biologic component of the jointly sponsored National Cancer Institute and LiveStrong Foundation workshop entitled "Next Steps in Adolescent and Young Adult Oncology" summarizes the current status of biologic and translational research progress for 5 AYA cancers; colorectal cancer breast cancer, acute lymphoblastic leukemia, melanoma, and sarcoma. Conclusions from this meeting included the need for basic biologic, genomic, and model development for AYA cancers as well as translational research studies to elucidate any fundamental differences between pediatric, AYA, and adult cancers. The biologic questions for future research are whether there are mutational or signaling pathway differences (for example, between adult and AYA colorectal cancer) that can be clinically exploited to develop novel therapies for treating AYA cancers and to develop companion diagnostics.

Phase II Trial of Afatinib in Patients With EGFR-Mutated Solid Tumors Excluding Lung Cancer: Results From NCI-MATCH ECOG-ACRIN Trial (EAY131) Subprotocol A.

PURPOSE: National Cancer Institute-Molecular Analysis for Therapy Choice (NCI-MATCH) was a multicohort phase 2 trial that assigned patients with advanced pretreated cancers to molecularly targeted therapies on the basis of tumor genomic testing. NCI-MATCH Arm A evaluated afatinib, an EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) approved for advanced non-small cell lung cancer, in patients with tumors other than lung cancer harboring EGFR mutations. METHODS: Patients with advanced pretreated cancers other than lung cancer found to have selected actionable EGFR mutations were offered participation in Arm A. Previous therapy with an EGFR TKI was not allowed. Patients received afatinib 40 mg once daily continuously until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR). Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), 6-month PFS, and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Seventeen patients received protocol therapy. Tumor types included glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) (13), gliosarcoma (1), adenocarcinoma not otherwise specified (NOS) (2), and adenosquamous carcinoma of the breast (1). Fifty-nine percent of patients received ≥2 lines of previous therapy. The ORR was 11.8% (90% CI, 2.1 to 32.6), with one complete response lasting 16.4 months (GBM harboring a rare exon 18 EGFR-SEPT14 fusion) and one partial response lasting 12.8 months (adenocarcinoma NOS with the classic EGFR mutation, p.Glu746_Ala750del). Three patients had stable disease. The 6-month PFS was 15% (90% CI, 0 to 30.7); the median OS was 9 months (90% CI, 4.6 to 14.0). Rash and diarrhea were the most common toxicities. CONCLUSION: Afatinib had modest activity in a cohort of patients with heavily pretreated cancer with advanced nonlung, EGFR-mutated tumors, but the trial's primary end point was not met. Further evaluation of afatinib in GBM with EGFR exon 18 fusions may be of interest.

Phase II Study of Ulixertinib in Children and Young Adults With Tumors Harboring Activating Mitogen-Activated Protein Kinase Pathway Alterations: APEC1621J of the National Cancer Institute-Children's Oncology Group Pediatric MATCH Trial.

PURPOSE: The National Cancer Institute-Children's Oncology Group (NCI-COG) Pediatric MATCH trial assigns patients age 1-21 years with refractory malignancies to phase II treatment arms of molecularly targeted therapies on the basis of genetic alterations detected in their tumor. Patients with activating alterations in the mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway were treated with ulixertinib, an extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK)1/2 inhibitor. METHODS: As there were no previous pediatric data, ulixertinib was initially tested in a dose escalation cohort to establish the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) before proceeding to the phase II cohort. Ulixertinib was administered at 260 mg/m2/dose orally twice a day (dose level 1 [DL1], n = 15) or 350 mg/m2/dose orally twice a day (DL2, n = 5). The primary end point was objective response rate; secondary end points included safety/tolerability and progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: Twenty patients (median 12 years; range, 5-20) were treated, all evaluable for response. CNS tumors comprised 55% (11/20) of diagnoses, with high-grade glioma and low-grade glioma most common (n = 5 each). All CNS tumors except one harbored BRAF fusions or V600E mutations. Rhabdomyosarcoma (n = 5) was the most frequent non-CNS diagnosis. DL1 was declared the RP2D in the dose escalation cohort after dose-limiting toxicities in Cycle 1 occurred in 1/6 patients at DL1 and 2/5 patients at DL2, including fatigue, anorexia, rash, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, dehydration, hypoalbuminemia, and hypernatremia. No objective responses were observed. Six-month PFS was 37% (95% CI, 17 to 58). Three patients with BRAF-altered CNS tumors achieved stable disease >6 months. CONCLUSION: Ulixertinib, a novel targeted agent with no previous pediatric data, was successfully evaluated in a national precision medicine basket trial. The pediatric RP2D of ulixertinib is 260 mg/m2/dose orally twice a day. Limited single-agent efficacy was observed in a biomarker-selected cohort of refractory pediatric tumors.

Trastuzumab and Pertuzumab in Patients with Non-Breast/Gastroesophageal HER2-Amplified Tumors: Results from the NCI-MATCH ECOG-ACRIN Trial (EAY131) Subprotocol J.

PURPOSE: NCI-MATCH assigned patients with advanced cancer and progression on prior treatment, based on genomic alterations in pretreatment tumor tissue. Arm J (EAY131-J) evaluated the combination of trastuzumab/pertuzumab (HP) across HER2-amplified tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients had high levels of HER2 amplification [copy number (CN) ≥7] detected by central next-generation sequencing (NGS) or through NCI-designated laboratories. Patients with breast/gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma and those who received prior HER2-directed therapy were excluded. Enrollment of patients with colorectal cancer was capped at 4 based on emerging data. Patients received HP IV Q3 weeks until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR); secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Thirty-five patients were enrolled, with 25 included in the primary efficacy analysis (CN ≥7 confirmed by a central lab, median CN = 28). Median age was 66 (range, 31-80), and half of all patients had ≥3 prior therapies (range, 1-11). The confirmed ORR was 12% [3/25 partial responses (colorectal, cholangiocarcinoma, urothelial cancers), 90% confidence interval (CI) 3.4%-28.2%]. There was one additional partial response (urothelial cancer) in a patient with an unconfirmed ERBB2 copy number. Median PFS was 3.3 months (90% CI 2.0-4.1), and median OS 9.4 months (90% CI 5.0-18.9). Treatment-emergent adverse events were consistent with prior studies. There was no association between HER2 CN and response. CONCLUSIONS: HP was active in a selection of HER2-amplified tumors (non-breast/gastroesophageal) but did not meet the predefined efficacy benchmark. Additional strategies targeting HER2 and potential resistance pathways are warranted, especially in rare tumors.

Phase II Study of Erdafitinib in Patients With Tumors With Fibroblast Growth Factor Receptor Mutations or Fusions: Results From the NCI-MATCH ECOG-ACRIN Trial (EAY131) Subprotocol K2.

PURPOSE: Subprotocol K2 (EAY131-K2) of the NCI-MATCH platform trial was an open-label, single-arm, phase II study designed to evaluate the antitumor efficacy of the oral FGFR1-4 inhibitor, erdafitinib, in patients with tumors harboring FGFR1-4 mutations or fusions. METHODS: Central confirmation of tumor FGFR1-4 mutations or fusions was required for outcome analysis. Patients with urothelial carcinoma were excluded. Enrolled subjects received oral erdafitinib at a starting dose of 8 mg daily continuously until intolerable toxicity or disease progression. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR) with key secondary end points of safety, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Thirty-five patients were enrolled, and 25 patients were included in the primary efficacy analysis as prespecified in the protocol. The median age was 61 years, and 52% of subjects had received ≥3 previous lines of therapy. The confirmed ORR was 16% (4 of 25 [90% CI, 5.7 to 33.0], P = .034 against the null rate of 5%). An additional seven patients experienced stable disease as best-confirmed response. Four patients had a prolonged PFS including two with recurrent WHO grade IV, IDH1-/2-wildtype glioblastoma. The median PFS and OS were 3.6 months and 11.0 months, respectively. Erdafitinib was manageable with no new safety signals. CONCLUSION: This study met its primary end point in patients with several pretreated solid tumor types harboring FGFR1-3 mutations or fusions. These findings support advancement of erdafitinib for patients with fibroblast growth factor receptor-altered tumors outside of currently approved indications in a potentially tumor-agnostic manner.

Phase II Study of Erdafitinib in Patients With Tumors With FGFR Amplifications: Results From the NCI-MATCH ECOG-ACRIN Trial (EAY131) Subprotocol K1.

PURPOSE: Despite fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitors being approved in tumor types with select FGFR rearrangements or gene mutations, amplifications of FGFR represent the most common FGFR alteration across malignancies. Subprotocol K1 (EAY131-K1) of the National Cancer Institute-MATCH platform trial was designed to evaluate the antitumor efficacy of the oral FGFR1-4 inhibitor, erdafitinib, in patients with tumors harboring FGFR1-4 amplification. METHODS: EAY131-K1 was an open-label, single-arm, phase II study with central confirmation of presence of FGFR1-4 amplification in tumors. Patients with urothelial carcinoma were excluded. Enrolled patients received oral erdafitinib at a starting dose of 8 mg once daily continuously with escalation to 9 mg once daily continuously, on the basis of predefined time point assessments of phosphate levels, until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. The primary end point was centrally assessed objective response rate (ORR), with key secondary end points being 6-month progression-free survival (PFS6), PFS, overall survival (OS), and safety. RESULTS: Thirty-five patients were enrolled into this study with 18 included in the prespecified primary efficacy analysis. The median age of the 18 patients was 60 years, and 78% had received ≥3 previous lines of therapy. There were no confirmed responses to erdafitinib; however, five patients experienced stable disease (SD) as best response. One patient with an FGFR1-amplified breast cancer had a prolonged PFS >168 days (5.5 months). The median PFS was 1.7 months (90% CI, 1.1 to 1.8 months) and the median OS was 4.2 months (90% CI, 2.3 to 9.3 months). The estimated PFS6 rate was 13.8% (90% CI, 3.3 to 31.6). The majority of toxicities were grade 1 to 2 in nature, although there was one grade 5 treatment-related adverse event. CONCLUSION: Erdafitinib did not meet its primary end point of efficacy as determined by ORR in treatment-refractory solid tumors harboring FGFR1-4 amplifications. Our findings support that rearrangements and gene mutations, but not amplifications, of FGFR remain the established FGFR alterations with approved indications for FGFR inhibition.

Phase II Study of Osimertinib in Patients With Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Mutations: Results From the NCI-MATCH ECOG-ACRIN (EAY131) Trial Subprotocol E.

PURPOSE: The National Cancer Institute Molecular Analysis for Therapy Choice trial is a signal-finding genomically driven platform trial that assigns patients with any advanced refractory solid tumor, lymphoma, or myeloma to targeted therapies on the basis of next-generation sequencing results. Subprotocol E evaluated osimertinib, an epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor, in patients with EGFR mutations. METHODS: Eligible patients had EGFR mutations (T790M or rare activating) and received osimertinib 80 mg once daily. Patients with lung cancer with EGFR T790M were excluded. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR), and the secondary end points were 6-month progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival, and toxicity. RESULTS: A total of 19 patients were enrolled: 17 were evaluable for toxicity and 13 for efficacy. The median age of the 13 included in the efficacy analysis was 63 years, 62% had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 1, and 31% received >three previous systemic therapies. The most common tumor type was brain cancers (54%). The ORR was 15.4% (n = 2 of 13; 90% CI, 2.8 to 41.0) and 6-month PFS was 16.7% (90% CI, 0 to 34.4). The two confirmed RECIST responses were observed in a patient with neuroendocrine carcinoma not otherwise specified (EGFR exon 20 S768T and exon 18 G719C mutation) and a patient with low-grade epithelial carcinoma of the paranasal sinus (EGFR D770_N771insSVD). The most common (>20%) treatment-related adverse events were diarrhea, thrombocytopenia, and maculopapular rash. CONCLUSION: In this pretreated cohort, osimertinib did not meet the prespecified end point threshold for efficacy, but responses were seen in a neuroendocrine carcinoma with an EGFR exon 20 S768T and exon 18 G719C mutation and an epithelial carcinoma with an EGFR D770_N771insSVD mutation. Osimertinib was well tolerated and had a safety profile consistent with previous studies.

Criteria for the use of omics-based predictors in clinical trials: explanation and elaboration.

High-throughput 'omics' technologies that generate molecular profiles for biospecimens have been extensively used in preclinical studies to reveal molecular subtypes and elucidate the biological mechanisms of disease, and in retrospective studies on clinical specimens to develop mathematical models to predict clinical endpoints. Nevertheless, the translation of these technologies into clinical tests that are useful for guiding management decisions for patients has been relatively slow. It can be difficult to determine when the body of evidence for an omics-based test is sufficiently comprehensive and reliable to support claims that it is ready for clinical use, or even that it is ready for definitive evaluation in a clinical trial in which it may be used to direct patient therapy. Reasons for this difficulty include the exploratory and retrospective nature of many of these studies, the complexity of these assays and their application to clinical specimens, and the many potential pitfalls inherent in the development of mathematical predictor models from the very high-dimensional data generated by these omics technologies. Here we present a checklist of criteria to consider when evaluating the body of evidence supporting the clinical use of a predictor to guide patient therapy. Included are issues pertaining to specimen and assay requirements, the soundness of the process for developing predictor models, expectations regarding clinical study design and conduct, and attention to regulatory, ethical, and legal issues. The proposed checklist should serve as a useful guide to investigators preparing proposals for studies involving the use of omics-based tests. The US National Cancer Institute plans to refer to these guidelines for review of proposals for studies involving omics tests, and it is hoped that other sponsors will adopt the checklist as well.

National Cancer Institute Combination Therapy Platform Trial with Molecular Analysis for Therapy Choice (ComboMATCH).

Over the past decade, multiple trials, including the precision medicine trial National Cancer Institute-Molecular Analysis for Therapy Choice (NCI-MATCH, EAY131, NCT02465060) have sought to determine if treating cancer based on specific genomic alterations is effective, irrespective of the cancer histology. Although many therapies are now approved for the treatment of cancers harboring specific genomic alterations, most patients do not respond to therapies targeting a single alteration. Further, when antitumor responses do occur, they are often not durable due to the development of drug resistance. Therefore, there is a great need to identify rational combination therapies that may be more effective. To address this need, the NCI and National Clinical Trials Network have developed NCI-ComboMATCH, the successor to NCI-MATCH. Like the original trial, NCI-ComboMATCH is a signal-seeking study. The goal of ComboMATCH is to overcome drug resistance to single-agent therapy and/or utilize novel synergies to increase efficacy by developing genomically-directed combination therapies, supported by strong preclinical in vivo evidence. Although NCI-MATCH was mainly comprised of multiple single-arm studies, NCI-ComboMATCH tests combination therapy, evaluating both combination of targeted agents as well as combinations of targeted therapy with chemotherapy. Although NCI-MATCH was histology agnostic with selected tumor exclusions, ComboMATCH has histology-specific and histology-agnostic arms. Although NCI-MATCH consisted of single-arm studies, ComboMATCH utilizes single-arm as well as randomized designs. NCI-MATCH had a separate, parallel Pediatric MATCH trial, whereas ComboMATCH will include children within the same trial. We present rationale, scientific principles, study design, and logistics supporting the ComboMATCH study.

Tazemetostat for tumors harboring SMARCB1/SMARCA4 or EZH2 alterations: results from NCI-COG pediatric MATCH APEC1621C.

BACKGROUND: National Cancer Institute-Children's Oncology Group Pediatric Molecular Analysis for Therapy Choice assigns patients aged 1-21 years with refractory solid tumors, brain tumors, lymphomas, and histiocytic disorders to phase II trials of molecularly targeted therapies based on detection of predefined genetic alterations. Patients whose tumors harbored EZH2 mutations or loss of SMARCB1 or SMARCA4 by immunohistochemistry were treated with EZH2 inhibitor tazemetostat. METHODS: Patients received tazemetostat for 28-day cycles until disease progression or intolerable toxicity (max 26 cycles). The primary endpoint was objective response rate; secondary endpoints included progression-free survival and tolerability of tazemetostat. RESULTS: Twenty patients (median age = 5 years) enrolled, all evaluable for response and toxicities. The most frequent diagnoses were atypical teratoid rhabdoid tumor (n = 8) and malignant rhabdoid tumor (n = 4). Actionable alterations consisted of SMARCB1 loss (n = 16), EZH2 mutation (n = 3), and SMARCA4 loss (n = 1). One objective response was observed in a patient with non-Langerhans cell histiocytosis with SMARCA4 loss (26 cycles, 1200 mg/m2/dose twice daily). Four patients with SMARCB1 loss had a best response of stable disease: epithelioid sarcoma (n = 2), atypical teratoid rhabdoid tumor (n = 1), and renal medullary carcinoma (n = 1). Six-month progression-free survival was 35% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 15.7% to 55.2%) and 6-month overall survival was 45% (95% CI = 23.1% to 64.7%). Treatment-related adverse events were consistent with prior tazemetostat reports. CONCLUSIONS: Although tazemetostat did not meet its primary efficacy endpoint in this population of refractory pediatric tumors (objective response rate = 5%, 90% CI = 1% to 20%), 25% of patients with multiple histologic diagnoses experienced prolonged stable disease of 6 months and over (range = 9-26 cycles), suggesting a potential effect of tazemetostat on disease stabilization.

The NCI-MATCH trial: lessons for precision oncology.

The NCI-MATCH (Molecular Analysis for Therapy Choice) trial ( NCT02465060 ) was launched in 2015 as a genomically driven, signal-seeking precision medicine platform trial-largely for patients with treatment-refractory, malignant solid tumors. Having completed in 2023, it remains one of the largest tumor-agnostic, precision oncology trials undertaken to date. Nearly 6,000 patients underwent screening and molecular testing, with a total of 1,593 patients (inclusive of continued accrual from standard next-generation sequencing) being assigned to one of 38 substudies. Each substudy was a phase 2 trial of a therapy matched to a genomic alteration, with a primary endpoint of objective tumor response by RECIST criteria. In this Perspective, we summarize the outcomes of the initial 27 substudies in NCI-MATCH, which met its signal-seeking objective with 7/27 positive substudies (25.9%). We discuss key aspects of the design and operational conduct of the trial, highlighting important lessons for future precision medicine studies.

Phase II Study of Selumetinib in Children and Young Adults With Tumors Harboring Activating Mitogen-Activated Protein Kinase Pathway Genetic Alterations: Arm E of the NCI-COG Pediatric MATCH Trial.

PURPOSE: The NCI-COG Pediatric MATCH trial assigns patients age 1-21 years with relapsed or refractory solid tumors, lymphomas, and histiocytic disorders to phase II studies of molecularly targeted therapies on the basis of detection of predefined genetic alterations. Patients with tumors harboring mutations or fusions driving activation of the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway were treated with the MEK inhibitor selumetinib. METHODS: Patients received selumetinib twice daily for 28-day cycles until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. The primary end point was objective response rate; secondary end points included progression-free survival and tolerability of selumetinib. RESULTS: Twenty patients (median age: 14 years) were treated. All were evaluable for response and toxicities. The most frequent diagnoses were high-grade glioma (HGG; n = 7) and rhabdomyosarcoma (n = 7). Twenty-one actionable mutations were detected: hotspot mutations in KRAS (n = 8), NRAS (n = 3), and HRAS (n = 1), inactivating mutations in NF1 (n = 7), and BRAF V600E (n = 2). No objective responses were observed. Three patients had a best response of stable disease including two patients with HGG (NF1 mutation, six cycles; KRAS mutation, 12 cycles). Six-month progression-free survival was 15% (95% CI, 4 to 34). Five patients (25%) experienced a grade 3 or higher adverse event that was possibly or probably attributable to study drug. CONCLUSION: A national histology-agnostic molecular screening strategy was effective at identifying children and young adults eligible for treatment with selumetinib in the first Pediatric MATCH treatment arm to be completed. MEK inhibitors have demonstrated promising responses in some pediatric tumors (eg, low-grade glioma and plexiform neurofibroma). However, selumetinib in this cohort with treatment-refractory tumors harboring MAPK alterations demonstrated limited efficacy, indicating that pathway mutation status alone is insufficient to predict response to selumetinib monotherapy for pediatric cancers.

Actionable Tumor Alterations and Treatment Protocol Enrollment of Pediatric and Young Adult Patients With Refractory Cancers in the National Cancer Institute-Children's Oncology Group Pediatric MATCH Trial.

PURPOSE: The National Cancer Institute-Children's Oncology Group Pediatric MATCH trial aimed to facilitate evaluation of molecular-targeted therapies in biomarker-selected cohorts of childhood and young adult patients with cancer by screening tumors for actionable alterations. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Tumors from patients age 1-21 years with refractory solid tumors, lymphomas, or histiocytic disorders were subjected to cancer gene panel sequencing and limited immunohistochemistry to identify actionable alterations for assignment to phase II treatment arms. The rates of treatment arm assignment and enrollment were compared between clinical and demographic groups. RESULTS: Testing was completed for 94.7% of tumors submitted. Actionable alterations were detected in 31.5% of the first 1,000 tumors screened, with treatment arm assignment and enrollment occurring in 28.4% and 13.1% of patients, respectively. Assignment rates varied by tumor histology and were higher for patients with CNS tumors or enrolled at Pediatric Early Phase Clinical Trials Network sites. A reported history of prior clinical molecular testing was associated with higher assignment and enrollment rates. Actionable alterations in the mitogen-activated protein kinase signaling pathway were most frequent (11.2%). The most common reasons provided for not enrolling on treatment arms were patients receiving other treatment or poor clinical status. CONCLUSION: The Pediatric MATCH trial has proven the feasibility of a nationwide screening Protocol for identification of actionable genetic alterations and assignment of pediatric and young adult patients with refractory cancers to trials of molecularly targeted therapies. These data support the early use of tumor molecular screening for childhood patients with cancer whose tumors have not responded to standard treatments.

The Exceptional Responders Initiative: Feasibility of a National Cancer Institute Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND: Tumor molecular profiling from patients experiencing exceptional responses to systemic therapy may provide insights into cancer biology and improve treatment tailoring. This pilot study evaluates the feasibility of identifying exceptional responders retrospectively, obtaining pre-exceptional response treatment tumor tissues, and analyzing them with state-of-the-art molecular analysis tools to identify potential molecular explanations for responses. METHODS: Exceptional response was defined as partial (PR) or complete (CR) response to a systemic treatment with population PR or CR rate less than 10% or an unusually long response (eg, duration >3 times published median). Cases proposed by patients' clinicians were reviewed by clinical and translational experts. Tumor and normal tissue (if possible) were profiled with whole exome sequencing and, if possible, targeted deep sequencing, RNA sequencing, methylation arrays, and immunohistochemistry. Potential germline mutations were tracked for relevance to disease. RESULTS: Cases reflected a variety of tumors and standard and investigational treatments. Of 520 cases, 476 (91.5%) were accepted for further review, and 222 of 476 (46.6%) proposed cases met requirements as exceptional responders. Clinical data were obtained from 168 of 222 cases (75.7%). Tumor was provided from 130 of 168 cases (77.4%). Of 117 of the 130 (90.0%) cases with sufficient nucleic acids, 109 (93.2%) were successfully analyzed; 6 patients had potentially actionable germline mutations. CONCLUSION: Exceptional responses occur with standard and investigational treatment. Retrospective identification of exceptional responders, accessioning, and sequencing of pretreatment archived tissue is feasible. Data from molecular analyses of tumors, particularly when combining results from patients who received similar treatments, may elucidate molecular bases for exceptional responses.

Molecular Features of Cancers Exhibiting Exceptional Responses to Treatment.

A small fraction of cancer patients with advanced disease survive significantly longer than patients with clinically comparable tumors. Molecular mechanisms for exceptional responses to therapy have been identified by genomic analysis of tumor biopsies from individual patients. Here, we analyzed tumor biopsies from an unbiased cohort of 111 exceptional responder patients using multiple platforms to profile genetic and epigenetic aberrations as well as the tumor microenvironment. Integrative analysis uncovered plausible mechanisms for the therapeutic response in nearly a quarter of the patients. The mechanisms were assigned to four broad categories-DNA damage response, intracellular signaling, immune engagement, and genetic alterations characteristic of favorable prognosis-with many tumors falling into multiple categories. These analyses revealed synthetic lethal relationships that may be exploited therapeutically and rare genetic lesions that favor therapeutic success, while also providing a wealth of testable hypotheses regarding oncogenic mechanisms that may influence the response to cancer therapy.