Isatuximab monotherapy in patients with refractory T-acute lymphoblastic leukemia or T-lymphoblastic lymphoma: Phase 2 study.

The poor prognosis of acute T-cell lymphoblastic leukemia (T-ALL) and T-cell lymphoblastic lymphoma (T-LBL) in older adults and patients with relapsed/refractory illness is an unmet clinical need, as there is no defined standard of care and there are few treatment options. Abnormally elevated CD38 expression in T-ALL and T-LBL is associated with tumor expansion and disease development, making CD38 a potential target for anti-T-ALL and T-LBL treatment. Isatuximab is a monoclonal antibody that binds to a specific epitope on CD38. The purpose of the study was to assess the efficacy and safety of isatuximab monotherapy in a phase 2, multicenter, one-arm, open-label study in patients with relapsed or refractory T-ALL or T-LBL (Clinical Trials.gov identifier NCT02999633). The primary endpoint was to assess the efficacy of isatuximab by overall response rate (ORR). An interim analysis based on the efficacy and safety of isatuximab in the first 19 patients enrolled was scheduled, however only 14 patients were enrolled in the study. No patient achieved complete response (CR) or CR with incomplete peripheral recovery. Most patients (11 [78.6%]) developed progressive disease and had progressive disease as their best response. A total of 10 (71.4%) patients had treatment emergent adverse events considered treatment-related, with infusion reactions as the most frequent drug-related TEAE, occurring in 8 (57.1%) patients. Despite the low efficacy of isatuximab in the current study, it is likely that the use of immunotherapy medication in T-ALL will be expanded through logically targeted approaches, together with advances in the design of T-cell therapy and clinical experience and will provide restorative options beyond chemotherapy and targeted treatments.

AMEERA-1 phase 1/2 study of amcenestrant, SAR439859, in postmenopausal women with ER-positive/HER2-negative advanced breast cancer.

AMEERA-1 is a Phase 1/2 open-label single-arm study evaluating once-daily (QD) amcenestrant, an orally bioavailable selective estrogen receptor (ER) degrader, in postmenopausal women with ER+/HER2- advanced breast cancer (NCT03284957), who were mostly heavily pretreated (including targeted therapies and fulvestrant). In the dose escalation phase (Part A: n = 16), patients received amcenestrant 20-600 mg QD. Based on absence of dose-limiting toxicities, paired functional 18F-fluoroestradiol positron emission tomography, and pharmacokinetics, 400 mg QD was selected as recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D) for the dose expansion phase (Part B: n = 49). No Grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events or clinically significant cardiac/eye toxicities were reported. The Part B primary endpoint, confirmed objective response rate (ORR) was 3/45 at the interim analysis and 5/46 (10.9%) at the final analysis. The overall clinical benefit rate (CBR) was 13/46 (28.3%). CBRs among patients with baseline wild-type and mutated ESR1 were 9/26 (34.6%) and 4/19 (21.1%), respectively. Paired tumor biopsy and cell-free DNA analyses revealed ER inhibition and degradation, and a reduction in detectable ESR1 mutations, including Y537S. In conclusion, amcenestrant at RP2D of 400 mg QD for monotherapy is well-tolerated with no dose-limiting toxicities, and demonstrates preliminary antitumor activity irrespective of baseline ESR1 mutation status.

Reducing Patient Burden in Clinical Trials Through the Use of Historical Controls: Appropriate Selection of Historical Data to Minimize Risk of Bias.

Historical data have been used to augment or replace control arms in some rare disease and pediatric clinical trials. With greater availability of historical data and new methodology such as dynamic borrowing, the inclusion of historical data in clinical trials is an increasingly appealing approach for larger disease areas as well, as this can result in increased power and precision and can minimize the burden on patients in clinical trials. However, sponsors must assess whether the potential biases incurred with this approach outweigh the benefits and discuss this trade-off with the regulatory agencies. This paper discusses important points for the appropriate selection of historical controls for inclusion in the analysis of primary and/or key secondary endpoint(s) in clinical trials. The general steps are as follows: (1) Assess whether a trial is a suitable candidate for this approach. (2) If it is, then carefully identify appropriate historical trials to minimize selection bias. (3) Refine the historical control set if appropriate, for example, by selecting subsets of studies or patients. Identification of trial settings that are amenable to historical borrowing and selection of appropriate historical data using the principles discussed in this paper has the potential to lead to more efficient estimation and decision making. Ultimately, this efficiency gain results in lower patient burden and gets effective drugs to patients more quickly.