Cost-Effectiveness of Unselected Multigene Germline and Somatic Genetic Testing for Epithelial Ovarian Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Parallel panel germline and somatic genetic testing of all patients with ovarian cancer (OC) can identify more pathogenic variants (PVs) that would benefit from PARP inhibitor (PARPi) therapy, and allow for precision prevention in unaffected relatives with PVs. In this study, we estimate the cost-effectiveness and population impact of parallel panel germline and somatic BRCA testing of all patients with OC incorporating PARPi therapy in the United Kingdom and the United States compared with clinical criteria/family history (FH)-based germline BRCA testing. We also evaluate the cost-effectiveness of multigene panel germline testing alone. METHODS: Microsimulation cost-effectiveness modeling using data from 2,391 (UK: n=1,483; US: n=908) unselected, population-based patients with OC was used to compare lifetime costs and effects of panel germline and somatic BRCA testing of all OC cases (with PARPi therapy) (strategy A) versus clinical criteria/FH-based germline BRCA testing (strategy B). Unaffected relatives with germline BRCA1/BRCA2/RAD51C/RAD51D/BRIP1 PVs identified through cascade testing underwent appropriate OC and breast cancer (BC) risk-reduction interventions. We also compared the cost-effectiveness of multigene panel germline testing alone (without PARPi therapy) versus strategy B. Unaffected relatives with PVs could undergo risk-reducing interventions. Lifetime horizon with payer/societal perspectives, along with probabilistic/one-way sensitivity analyses, are presented. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained were compared with £30,000/QALY (UK) and $100,000/QALY (US) thresholds. OC incidence, BC incidence, and prevented deaths were estimated. RESULTS: Compared with clinical criteria/FH-based BRCA testing, BRCA1/BRCA2/RAD51C/RAD51D/BRIP1 germline testing and BRCA1/BRCA2 somatic testing of all patients with OC incorporating PARPi therapy had a UK ICER of £51,175/QALY (payer perspective) and £50,202/QALY (societal perspective) and a US ICER of $175,232/QALY (payer perspective) and $174,667/QALY (societal perspective), above UK/NICE and US cost-effectiveness thresholds in the base case. However, strategy A becomes cost-effective if PARPi costs decrease by 45% to 46% or if overall survival with PARPi reaches a hazard ratio of 0.28. Unselected panel germline testing alone (without PARPi therapy) is cost-effective, with payer-perspective ICERs of £11,291/QALY or $68,808/QALY and societal-perspective ICERs of £6,923/QALY or $65,786/QALY. One year's testing could prevent 209 UK BC/OC cases and 192 deaths, and 560 US BC/OC cases and 460 deaths. CONCLUSIONS: Unselected panel germline and somatic BRCA testing can become cost-effective, with a 45% to 46% reduction in PARPi costs. Regarding germline testing, unselected panel germline testing is highly cost-effective and should replace BRCA testing alone.

Targeting T regulatory (Treg) cells in immunotherapy-resistant cancers.

Primary or secondary (i.e., acquired) resistance is a common occurrence in cancer patients and is often associated with high numbers of T regulatory (Treg) cells (CD4+CD25+FOXP3+). The approval of ipilimumab and the development of similar pharmacological agents targeting cell surface proteins on Treg cells demonstrates that such intervention may overcome resistance in cancer patients. Hence, the clinical development and subsequent approval of Cytotoxic T Lymphocyte Antigen-4 (CTLA-4) targeting agents can serve as a prototype for similar agents. Such new agents aspire to be highly specific and have a reduced toxicity profile while increasing effector T cell function or effector T/T regulatory (Teff/Treg) ratio. While clinical development with large molecules has shown the greatest advancement, small molecule inhibitors that target immunomodulation are increasingly entering early clinical investigation. These new small molecule inhibitors often target specific intracellular signaling pathways [e.g., phosphoinositide-3-kinase delta (PI3K-δ)] that play an important role in regulating the function of Treg cells. This review will summarize the lessons currently applied to develop novel clinical agents that target Treg cells.

A phase I open-label, dose-escalation study of NUC-3373, a targeted thymidylate synthase inhibitor, in patients with advanced cancer (NuTide:301).

PURPOSE: 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) is inefficiently converted to the active anti-cancer metabolite, fluorodeoxyuridine-monophosphate (FUDR-MP), is associated with dose-limiting toxicities and challenging administration schedules. NUC-3373 is a phosphoramidate nucleotide analog of fluorodeoxyuridine (FUDR) designed to overcome these limitations and replace fluoropyrimidines such as 5-FU. PATIENTS AND METHODS: NUC-3373 was administered as monotherapy to patients with advanced solid tumors refractory to standard therapy via intravenous infusion either on Days 1, 8, 15 and 22 (Part 1) or on Days 1 and 15 (Part 2) of 28-day cycles until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary objectives were maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended Phase II dose (RP2D) and schedule of NUC-3373. Secondary objectives included pharmacokinetics (PK), and anti-tumor activity. RESULTS: Fifty-nine patients received weekly NUC-3373 in 9 cohorts in Part 1 (n = 43) and 3 alternate-weekly dosing cohorts in Part 2 (n = 16). They had received a median of 3 prior lines of treatment (range: 0-11) and 74% were exposed to prior fluoropyrimidines. Four experienced dose-limiting toxicities: two Grade (G) 3 transaminitis; one G2 headache; and one G3 transient hypotension. Commonest treatment-related G3 adverse event of raised transaminases occurred in < 10% of patients. NUC-3373 showed a favorable PK profile, with dose-proportionality and a prolonged half-life compared to 5-FU. A best overall response of stable disease was observed, with prolonged progression-free survival. CONCLUSION: NUC-3373 was well-tolerated in a heavily pre-treated solid tumor patient population, including those who had relapsed on prior 5-FU. The MTD and RP2D was defined as 2500 mg/m2 NUC-3373 weekly. NUC-3373 is currently in combination treatment studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov registry number NCT02723240. Trial registered on 8th December 2015. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT02723240 .

Promising and Minimally Invasive Biomarkers: Targeting Melanoma.

The therapeutic landscape of malignant melanoma has been radically reformed in recent years, with novel treatments emerging in both the field of cancer immunotherapy and signalling pathway inhibition. Large-scale tumour genomic characterization has accurately classified malignant melanoma into four different genomic subtypes so far. Despite this, only somatic mutations in BRAF oncogene, as assessed in tumour biopsies, has so far become a validated predictive biomarker of treatment with small molecule inhibitors. The biology of tumour evolution and heterogeneity has uncovered the current limitations associated with decoding genomic drivers based only on a single-site tumour biopsy. There is an urgent need to develop minimally invasive biomarkers that accurately reflect the real-time evolution of melanoma and that allow for streamlined collection, analysis, and interpretation. These will enable us to face challenges with tumour tissue attainment and process and will fulfil the vision of utilizing "liquid biopsy" to guide clinical decisions, in a manner akin to how it is used in the management of haematological malignancies. In this review, we will summarize the most recent published evidence on the role of minimally invasive biomarkers in melanoma, commenting on their future potential to lead to practice-changing discoveries.