Genomic and Transcriptomic Features of Response to Anti-PD-1 Therapy in Metastatic Melanoma.

PD-1 immune checkpoint blockade provides significant clinical benefits for melanoma patients. We analyzed the somatic mutanomes and transcriptomes of pretreatment melanoma biopsies to identify factors that may influence innate sensitivity or resistance to anti-PD-1 therapy. We find that overall high mutational loads associate with improved survival, and tumors from responding patients are enriched for mutations in the DNA repair gene BRCA2. Innately resistant tumors display a transcriptional signature (referred to as the IPRES, or innate anti-PD-1 resistance), indicating concurrent up-expression of genes involved in the regulation of mesenchymal transition, cell adhesion, extracellular matrix remodeling, angiogenesis, and wound healing. Notably, mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK)-targeted therapy (MAPK inhibitor) induces similar signatures in melanoma, suggesting that a non-genomic form of MAPK inhibitor resistance mediates cross-resistance to anti-PD-1 therapy. Validation of the IPRES in other independent tumor cohorts defines a transcriptomic subset across distinct types of advanced cancer. These findings suggest that attenuating the biological processes that underlie IPRES may improve anti-PD-1 response in melanoma and other cancer types.

Discovery of WRN inhibitor HRO761 with synthetic lethality in MSI cancers.

The Werner syndrome RecQ helicase WRN was identified as a synthetic lethal target in cancer cells with microsatellite instability (MSI) by several genetic screens1-6. Despite advances in treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors7-10, there is an unmet need in the treatment of MSI cancers11-14. Here we report the structural, biochemical, cellular and pharmacological characterization of the clinical-stage WRN helicase inhibitor HRO761, which was identified through an innovative hit-finding and lead-optimization strategy. HRO761 is a potent, selective, allosteric WRN inhibitor that binds at the interface of the D1 and D2 helicase domains, locking WRN in an inactive conformation. Pharmacological inhibition by HRO761 recapitulated the phenotype observed by WRN genetic suppression, leading to DNA damage and inhibition of tumour cell growth selectively in MSI cells in a p53-independent manner. Moreover, HRO761 led to WRN degradation in MSI cells but not in microsatellite-stable cells. Oral treatment with HRO761 resulted in dose-dependent in vivo DNA damage induction and tumour growth inhibition in MSI cell- and patient-derived xenograft models. These findings represent preclinical pharmacological validation of WRN as a therapeutic target in MSI cancers. A clinical trial with HRO761 (NCT05838768) is ongoing to assess the safety, tolerability and preliminary anti-tumour activity in patients with MSI colorectal cancer and other MSI solid tumours.

The broadening scope of oral mucositis and oral ulcerative mucosal toxicities of anticancer therapies.

Oral mucositis (OM) is a common, highly symptomatic complication of cancer therapy that affects patients' function, quality of life, and ability to tolerate treatment. In certain patients with cancer, OM is associated with increased mortality. Research on the management of OM is ongoing. Oral mucosal toxicities are also reported in targeted and immune checkpoint inhibitor therapies. The objective of this article is to present current knowledge about the epidemiology, pathogenesis, assessment, risk prediction, and current and developing intervention strategies for OM and other ulcerative mucosal toxicities caused by both conventional and evolving forms of cancer therapy.

Mechanisms of DNA-protein crosslink repair.

Covalent DNA-protein crosslinks (DPCs, also known as protein adducts) of topoisomerases and other proteins with DNA are highly toxic DNA lesions. Of note, chemical agents that induce DPCs include widely used classes of chemotherapeutics. Their bulkiness blocks virtually every chromatin-based process and makes them intractable for repair by canonical repair pathways. Distinct DPC repair pathways employ unique points of attack and are crucial for the maintenance of genome stability. Tyrosyl-DNA phosphodiesterases (TDPs) directly hydrolyse the covalent linkage between protein and DNA. The MRE11-RAD50-NBS1 (MRN) nuclease complex targets the DNA component of DPCs, excising the fragment affected by the lesion, whereas proteases of the spartan (SPRTN)/weak suppressor of SMT3 protein 1 (Wss1) family target the protein component. Loss of these pathways renders cells sensitive to DPC-inducing chemotherapeutics, and DPC repair pathways are thus attractive targets for combination cancer therapy.

Onconephrology: The intersections between the kidney and cancer.

Onconephrology is a new subspecialty of nephrology that recognizes the important intersections of kidney disease with cancer. This intersection takes many forms and includes drug-induced nephrotoxicity, electrolyte disorders, paraneoplastic glomerulonephritis, and the interactions of chronic kidney disease with cancer. Data clearly demonstrate that, when patients with cancer develop acute or chronic kidney disease, outcomes are inferior, and the promise of curative therapeutic regimens is lessened. This highlights the imperative for collaborative care between oncologists and nephrologists in recognizing and treating kidney disease in patients with cancer. In response to this need, specific training programs in onconephrology as well as dedicated onconephrology clinics have appeared. This comprehensive review covers many of the critical topics in onconephrology, with a focus on acute kidney injury, chronic kidney disease, drug-induced nephrotoxicity, kidney disease in stem cell transplantation, and electrolyte disorders in patients with cancer.

Belzutifan versus Everolimus for Advanced Renal-Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Belzutifan, a hypoxia-inducible factor 2α inhibitor, showed clinical activity in clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma in early-phase studies. METHODS: In a phase 3, multicenter, open-label, active-controlled trial, we enrolled participants with advanced clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma who had previously received immune checkpoint and antiangiogenic therapies and randomly assigned them, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive 120 mg of belzutifan or 10 mg of everolimus orally once daily until disease progression or unacceptable toxic effects occurred. The dual primary end points were progression-free survival and overall survival. The key secondary end point was the occurrence of an objective response (a confirmed complete or partial response). RESULTS: A total of 374 participants were assigned to belzutifan, and 372 to everolimus. At the first interim analysis (median follow-up, 18.4 months), the median progression-free survival was 5.6 months in both groups; at 18 months, 24.0% of the participants in the belzutifan group and 8.3% in the everolimus group were alive and free of progression (two-sided P = 0.002, which met the prespecified significance criterion). A confirmed objective response occurred in 21.9% of the participants (95% confidence interval [CI], 17.8 to 26.5) in the belzutifan group and in 3.5% (95% CI, 1.9 to 5.9) in the everolimus group (P<0.001, which met the prespecified significance criterion). At the second interim analysis (median follow-up, 25.7 months), the median overall survival was 21.4 months in the belzutifan group and 18.1 months in the everolimus group; at 18 months, 55.2% and 50.6% of the participants, respectively, were alive (hazard ratio for death, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.07; two-sided P = 0.20, which did not meet the prespecified significance criterion). Grade 3 or higher adverse events of any cause occurred in 61.8% of the participants in the belzutifan group (grade 5 in 3.5%) and in 62.5% in the everolimus group (grade 5 in 5.3%). Adverse events led to discontinuation of treatment in 5.9% and 14.7% of the participants, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Belzutifan showed a significant benefit over everolimus with respect to progression-free survival and objective response in participants with advanced clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma who had previously received immune checkpoint and antiangiogenic therapies. Belzutifan was associated with no new safety signals. (Funded by Merck Sharp and Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck; LITESPARK-005 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04195750.).

Asciminib in Newly Diagnosed Chronic Myeloid Leukemia.

BACKGROUND: Patients with newly diagnosed chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) need long-term therapy with high efficacy and safety. Asciminib, a BCR::ABL1 inhibitor specifically targeting the ABL myristoyl pocket, may offer better efficacy and safety and fewer side effects than currently available frontline ATP-competitive tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). METHODS: In a phase 3 trial, patients with newly diagnosed CML were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either asciminib (80 mg once daily) or an investigator-selected TKI, with randomization stratified by European Treatment and Outcome Study long-term survival score category (low, intermediate, or high risk) and by TKI selected by investigators before randomization (including imatinib and second-generation TKIs). The primary end points were major molecular response (defined as BCR::ABL1 transcript levels ≤0.1% on the International Scale [IS]) at week 48, for comparisons between asciminib and investigator-selected TKIs and between asciminib and investigator-selected TKIs in the prerandomization-selected imatinib stratum. RESULTS: A total of 201 patients were assigned to receive asciminib and 204 to receive investigator-selected TKIs. The median follow-up was 16.3 months in the asciminib group and 15.7 months in the investigator-selected TKI group. A major molecular response at week 48 occurred in 67.7% of patients in the asciminib group, as compared with 49.0% in the investigator-selected TKI group (difference, 18.9 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 9.6 to 28.2; adjusted two-sided P<0.001]), and in 69.3% of patients in the asciminib group as compared with 40.2% in the imatinib group within the imatinib stratum (difference, 29.6 percentage points; 95% CI, 16.9 to 42.2; adjusted two-sided P<0.001). The percentage of patients with a major molecular response at week 48 was 66.0% with asciminib and 57.8% with TKIs in the second-generation TKI stratum (difference, 8.2 percentage points; 95% CI, -5.1 to 21.5). Adverse events of grade 3 or higher and events leading to discontinuation of the trial regimen were less frequent with asciminib (38.0% and 4.5%, respectively) than with imatinib (44.4% and 11.1%) and second-generation TKIs (54.9% and 9.8%). CONCLUSIONS: In this trial comparing asciminib with investigator-selected TKIs and imatinib, asciminib showed superior efficacy and a favorable safety profile in patients with newly diagnosed chronic-phase CML. Direct comparison between asciminib and second-generation TKIs was not a primary objective. (Funded by Novartis; ASC4FIRST ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04971226).

Blinatumomab for MRD-Negative Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia in Adults.

BACKGROUND: Many older adults with B-cell precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia (BCP-ALL) have a relapse despite having a measurable residual disease (MRD)-negative complete remission with combination chemotherapy. The addition of blinatumomab, a bispecific T-cell engager molecule that is approved for the treatment of relapsed, refractory, and MRD-positive BCP-ALL, may have efficacy in patients with MRD-negative remission. METHODS: In a phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned patients 30 to 70 years of age with BCR::ABL1-negative BCP-ALL (with :: indicating fusion) who had MRD-negative remission (defined as <0.01% leukemic cells in bone marrow as assessed on flow cytometry) after induction and intensification chemotherapy to receive four cycles of blinatumomab in addition to four cycles of consolidation chemotherapy or to receive four cycles of consolidation chemotherapy alone. The primary end point was overall survival, and relapse-free survival was a secondary end point. RESULTS: The data and safety monitoring committee reviewed the results from the third efficacy interim analysis and recommended that they be reported. Complete remission with or without full count recovery was observed in 395 of 488 enrolled patients (81%). Of the 224 patients with MRD-negative status, 112 were assigned to each group. The characteristics of the patients were balanced between the groups. At a median follow-up of 43 months, an advantage was observed in the blinatumomab group as compared with the chemotherapy-only group with regard to overall survival (at 3 years: 85% vs. 68%; hazard ratio for death, 0.41; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.23 to 0.73; P = 0.002), and the 3-year relapse-free survival was 80% with blinatumomab and 64% with chemotherapy alone (hazard ratio for relapse or death, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.32 to 0.87). A higher incidence of neuropsychiatric events was reported in the blinatumomab group than in the chemotherapy-only group. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of blinatumomab to consolidation chemotherapy in adult patients in MRD-negative remission from BCP-ALL significantly improved overall survival. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health and others; E1910 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02003222.).

Enfortumab Vedotin and Pembrolizumab in Untreated Advanced Urothelial Cancer.

BACKGROUND: No treatment has surpassed platinum-based chemotherapy in improving overall survival in patients with previously untreated locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma. METHODS: We conducted a phase 3, global, open-label, randomized trial to compare the efficacy and safety of enfortumab vedotin and pembrolizumab with the efficacy and safety of platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with previously untreated locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive 3-week cycles of enfortumab vedotin (at a dose of 1.25 mg per kilogram of body weight intravenously on days 1 and 8) and pembrolizumab (at a dose of 200 mg intravenously on day 1) (enfortumab vedotin-pembrolizumab group) or gemcitabine and either cisplatin or carboplatin (determined on the basis of eligibility to receive cisplatin) (chemotherapy group). The primary end points were progression-free survival as assessed by blinded independent central review and overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 886 patients underwent randomization: 442 to the enfortumab vedotin-pembrolizumab group and 444 to the chemotherapy group. As of August 8, 2023, the median duration of follow-up for survival was 17.2 months. Progression-free survival was longer in the enfortumab vedotin-pembrolizumab group than in the chemotherapy group (median, 12.5 months vs. 6.3 months; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.38 to 0.54; P<0.001), as was overall survival (median, 31.5 months vs. 16.1 months; hazard ratio for death, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.58; P<0.001). The median number of cycles was 12 (range, 1 to 46) in the enfortumab vedotin-pembrolizumab group and 6 (range, 1 to 6) in the chemotherapy group. Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred in 55.9% of the patients in the enfortumab vedotin-pembrolizumab group and in 69.5% of those in the chemotherapy group. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with enfortumab vedotin and pembrolizumab resulted in significantly better outcomes than chemotherapy in patients with untreated locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma, with a safety profile consistent with that in previous reports. (Funded by Astellas Pharma US and others; EV-302 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04223856.).

Brigatinib in NF2-Related Schwannomatosis with Progressive Tumors.

BACKGROUND: NF2-related schwannomatosis (NF2-SWN, formerly called neurofibromatosis type 2) is a tumor predisposition syndrome that is manifested by multiple vestibular schwannomas, nonvestibular schwannomas, meningiomas, and ependymomas. The condition is relentlessly progressive with no approved therapies. On the basis of preclinical activity of brigatinib (an inhibitor of multiple tyrosine kinases) in NF2-driven nonvestibular schwannoma and meningioma, data were needed on the use of brigatinib in patients with multiple types of progressive NF2-SWN tumors. METHODS: In this phase 2 platform trial with a basket design, patients who were 12 years of age or older with NF2-SWN and progressive tumors were treated with oral brigatinib at a dose of 180 mg daily. A central review committee evaluated one target tumor and up to five nontarget tumors in each patient. The primary outcome was radiographic response in target tumors. Key secondary outcomes were safety, response rate in all tumors, hearing response, and patient-reported outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 40 patients (median age, 26 years) with progressive target tumors (10 vestibular schwannomas, 8 nonvestibular schwannomas, 20 meningiomas, and 2 ependymomas) received treatment with brigatinib. After a median follow-up of 10.4 months, the percentage of tumors with a radiographic response was 10% (95% confidence interval [CI], 3 to 24) for target tumors and 23% (95% CI, 16 to 30) for all tumors; meningiomas and nonvestibular schwannomas had the greatest benefit. Annualized growth rates decreased for all tumor types during treatment. Hearing improvement occurred in 35% (95% CI, 20 to 53) of eligible ears. Exploratory analyses suggested a decrease in self-reported pain severity during treatment (-0.013 units per month; 95% CI, -0.002 to -0.029) on a scale from 0 (no pain) to 3 (severe pain). No grade 4 or 5 treatment-related adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Brigatinib treatment resulted in radiographic responses in multiple tumor types and clinical benefit in a heavily pretreated cohort of patients with NF2-SWN. (Funded by the Children's Tumor Foundation and others; INTUITT-NF2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04374305.).

Osimertinib after Chemoradiotherapy in Stage III EGFR-Mutated NSCLC.

BACKGROUND: Osimertinib is a recommended treatment for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with an epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation and as adjuvant treatment for resected EGFR-mutated NSCLC. EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors have shown preliminary efficacy in unresectable stage III EGFR-mutated NSCLC. METHODS: In this phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we randomly assigned patients with unresectable EGFR-mutated stage III NSCLC without progression during or after chemoradiotherapy to receive osimertinib or placebo until disease progression occurred (as assessed by blinded independent central review) or the regimen was discontinued. The primary end point was progression-free survival as assessed by blinded independent central review. RESULTS: A total of 216 patients who had undergone chemoradiotherapy were randomly assigned to receive osimertinib (143 patients) or placebo (73 patients). Osimertinib resulted in a significant progression-free survival benefit as compared with placebo: the median progression-free survival was 39.1 months with osimertinib versus 5.6 months with placebo, with a hazard ratio for disease progression or death of 0.16 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.10 to 0.24; P<0.001). The percentage of patients who were alive and progression free at 12 months was 74% (95% CI, 65 to 80) with osimertinib and 22% (95% CI, 13 to 32) with placebo. Interim overall survival data (maturity, 20%) showed 36-month overall survival among 84% of patients with osimertinib (95% CI, 75 to 89) and 74% with placebo (95% CI, 57 to 85), with a hazard ratio for death of 0.81 (95% CI, 0.42 to 1.56; P = 0.53). The incidence of adverse events of grade 3 or higher was 35% in the osimertinib group and 12% in the placebo group; radiation pneumonitis (majority grade, 1 to 2) was reported in 48% and 38%, respectively. No new safety concerns emerged. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with osimertinib resulted in significantly longer progression-free survival than placebo in patients with unresectable stage III EGFR-mutated NSCLC. (Funded by AstraZeneca; LAURA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03521154.).

Cardio-oncology care in the era of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic: An International Cardio-Oncology Society (ICOS) statement.

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has given rise to a pandemic of unprecedented proportions in the modern era because of its highly contagious nature and impact on human health and society: coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Patients with cardiovascular (CV) risk factors and established CV disease (CVD) are among those initially identified at the highest risk for serious complications, including death. Subsequent studies have pointed out that patients with cancer are also at high risk for a critical disease course. Therefore, the most vulnerable patients are seemingly those with both cancer and CVD, and a careful, unified approach in the evaluation and management of this patient population is especially needed in times of the COVID-19 pandemic. This review provides an overview of the unique implications of the viral outbreak for the field of cardio-oncology and outlines key modifications in the approach to this ever-increasing patient population. These modifications include a shift toward greater utilization of cardiac biomarkers and a more focused CV imaging approach in the broader context of modifications to typical practice pathways. The goal of this strategic adjustment is to minimize the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection (or other future viral outbreaks) while not becoming negligent of CVD and its important impact on the overall outcomes of patients who are being treated for cancer.

Zanubrutinib or Ibrutinib in Relapsed or Refractory Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia.

BACKGROUND: In a multinational, phase 3, head-to-head trial, ibrutinib, a Bruton's tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor, was compared with zanubrutinib, a BTK inhibitor with greater specificity, as treatment for relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) or small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL). In prespecified interim analyses, zanubrutinib was superior to ibrutinib with respect to overall response (the primary end point). Data from the final analysis of progression-free survival are now available. METHODS: We randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, patients with relapsed or refractory CLL or SLL who had received at least one previous course of therapy to receive zanubrutinib or ibrutinib until the occurrence of disease progression or unacceptable toxic effects. In this final analysis, progression-free survival (a key secondary end point) was assessed with the use of a hierarchical testing strategy to determine whether zanubrutinib was noninferior to ibrutinib. If noninferiority was established, the superiority of zanubrutinib was assessed and claimed if the two-sided P value was less than 0.05. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 29.6 months, zanubrutinib was found to be superior to ibrutinib with respect to progression-free survival among 652 patients (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.65; 95% confidence interval, [CI], 0.49 to 0.86; P = 0.002), as assessed by the investigators; the results were similar to those as assessed by an independent-review committee. At 24 months, the investigator-assessed rates of progression-free survival were 78.4% in the zanubrutinib group and 65.9% in the ibrutinib group. Among patients with a 17p deletion, a TP53 mutation, or both, those who received zanubrutinib had longer progression-free survival than those who received ibrutinib (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.31 to 0.88); progression-free survival across other major subgroups consistently favored zanubrutinib. The percentage of patients with an overall response was higher in the zanubrutinib group than in the ibrutinib group. The safety profile of zanubrutinib was better than that of ibrutinib, with fewer adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation and fewer cardiac events, including fewer cardiac events leading to treatment discontinuation or death. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with relapsed or refractory CLL or SLL, progression-free survival was significantly longer among patients who received zanubrutinib than among those who received ibrutinib, and zanubrutinib was associated with fewer cardiac adverse events. (Funded by BeiGene; ALPINE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03734016.).

Phase 3 Trial of Selpercatinib in Advanced RET-Mutant Medullary Thyroid Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Selpercatinib, a highly selective, potent RET inhibitor, has shown efficacy in advanced RET-mutant medullary thyroid cancer in a phase 1-2 trial, but its efficacy as compared with approved multikinase inhibitors is unclear. METHODS: We conducted a phase 3, randomized trial comparing selpercatinib as first-line therapy with the physician's choice of cabozantinib or vandetanib (control group). Eligible patients had progressive disease documented within 14 months before enrollment. The primary end point in the protocol-specified interim efficacy analysis was progression-free survival, assessed by blinded independent central review. Crossover to selpercatinib was permitted among patients in the control group after disease progression. Treatment failure-free survival, assessed by blinded independent central review, was a secondary, alpha-controlled end point that was to be tested only if progression-free survival was significant. Among the other secondary end points were overall response and safety. RESULTS: A total of 291 patients underwent randomization. At a median follow-up of 12 months, median progression-free survival as assessed by blinded independent central review was not reached in the selpercatinib group and was 16.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 12.2 to 25.1) in the control group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.16 to 0.48; P<0.001). Progression-free survival at 12 months was 86.8% (95% CI, 79.8 to 91.6) in the selpercatinib group and 65.7% (95% CI, 51.9 to 76.4) in the control group. Median treatment failure-free survival as assessed by blinded independent central review was not reached in the selpercatinib group and was 13.9 months in the control group (hazard ratio for disease progression, discontinuation due to treatment-related adverse events, or death, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.15 to 0.42; P<0.001). Treatment failure-free survival at 12 months was 86.2% (95% CI, 79.1 to 91.0) in the selpercatinib group and 62.1% (95% CI, 48.9 to 72.8) in the control group. The overall response was 69.4% (95% CI, 62.4 to 75.8) in the selpercatinib group and 38.8% (95% CI, 29.1 to 49.2) in the control group. Adverse events led to a dose reduction in 38.9% of the patients in the selpercatinib group, as compared with 77.3% in the control group, and to treatment discontinuation in 4.7% and 26.8%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Selpercatinib treatment resulted in superior progression-free survival and treatment failure-free survival as compared with cabozantinib or vandetanib in patients with RET-mutant medullary thyroid cancer. (Funded by Loxo Oncology, a subsidiary of Eli Lilly; LIBRETTO-531 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04211337.).

Pirtobrutinib after a Covalent BTK Inhibitor in Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia.

BACKGROUND: Patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) or small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL) have poor outcomes after the failure of covalent Bruton's tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor treatment, and new therapeutic options are needed. Pirtobrutinib, a highly selective, noncovalent (reversible) BTK inhibitor, was designed to reestablish BTK inhibition. METHODS: We conducted a phase 1-2 trial in which patients with relapsed or refractory B-cell cancers received pirtobrutinib. Here, we report efficacy results among patients with CLL or SLL who had previously received a BTK inhibitor as well as safety results among all the patients with CLL or SLL. The primary end point was an overall response (partial response or better) as assessed by independent review. Secondary end points included progression-free survival and safety. RESULTS: A total of 317 patients with CLL or SLL received pirtobrutinib, including 247 who had previously received a BTK inhibitor. Among these 247 patients, the median number of previous lines of therapy was 3 (range, 1 to 11), and 100 patients (40.5%) had also received a B-cell lymphoma 2 (BCL2) inhibitor such as venetoclax. The percentage of patients with an overall response to pirtobrutinib was 73.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 67.3 to 78.7), and the percentage was 82.2% (95% CI, 76.8 to 86.7) when partial response with lymphocytosis was included. The median progression-free survival was 19.6 months (95% CI, 16.9 to 22.1). Among all 317 patients with CLL or SLL who received pirtobrutinib, the most common adverse events were infections (in 71.0%), bleeding (in 42.6%), and neutropenia (in 32.5%). At a median duration of treatment of 16.5 months (range, 0.2 to 39.9), some adverse events that are typically associated with BTK inhibitors occurred relatively infrequently, including hypertension (in 14.2% of patients), atrial fibrillation or flutter (in 3.8%), and major hemorrhage (in 2.2%). Only 9 of 317 patients (2.8%) discontinued pirtobrutinib owing to a treatment-related adverse event. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial, pirtobrutinib showed efficacy in patients with heavily pretreated CLL or SLL who had received a covalent BTK inhibitor. The most common adverse events were infections, bleeding, and neutropenia. (Funded by Loxo Oncology; BRUIN ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03740529.).

Mezigdomide plus Dexamethasone in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma.

BACKGROUND: Despite recent progress, multiple myeloma remains incurable. Mezigdomide is a novel cereblon E3 ubiquitin ligase modulator with potent antiproliferative and tumoricidal activity in preclinical models of multiple myeloma, including those resistant to lenalidomide and pomalidomide. METHODS: In this phase 1-2 study, we administered oral mezigdomide in combination with dexamethasone to patients with relapsed and refractory myeloma. The primary objectives of phase 1 (dose-escalation cohort) were to assess safety and pharmacokinetics and to identify the dose and schedule for phase 2. In phase 2 (dose-expansion cohort), objectives included the assessment of the overall response (partial response or better), safety, and efficacy of mezigdomide plus dexamethasone at the dose and schedule determined in phase 1. RESULTS: In phase 1, a total of 77 patients were enrolled in the study. The most common dose-limiting toxic effects were neutropenia and febrile neutropenia. On the basis of the phase 1 findings, investigators determined the recommended phase 2 dose of mezigdomide to be 1.0 mg, given once daily in combination with dexamethasone for 21 days, followed by 7 days off, in each 28-day cycle. In phase 2, a total of 101 patients received the dose identified in phase 1 in the same schedule. All patients in the dose-expansion cohort had triple-class-refractory multiple myeloma, 30 patients (30%) had received previous anti-B-cell maturation antigen (anti-BCMA) therapy, and 40 (40%) had plasmacytomas. The most common adverse events, almost all of which proved to be reversible, included neutropenia (in 77% of the patients) and infection (in 65%; grade 3, 29%; grade 4, 6%). No unexpected toxic effects were encountered. An overall response occurred in 41% of the patients (95% confidence interval [CI], 31 to 51), the median duration of response was 7.6 months (95% CI, 5.4 to 9.5; data not mature), and the median progression-free survival was 4.4 months (95% CI, 3.0 to 5.5), with a median follow-up of 7.5 months (range, 0.5 to 21.9). CONCLUSIONS: The all-oral combination of mezigdomide plus dexamethasone showed promising efficacy in patients with heavily pretreated multiple myeloma, with treatment-related adverse events consisting mainly of myelotoxic effects. (Funded by Celgene, a Bristol-Myers Squibb Company; CC-92480-MM-001 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03374085; EudraCT number, 2017-001236-19.).

Tarlatamab for Patients with Previously Treated Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Tarlatamab, a bispecific T-cell engager immunotherapy targeting delta-like ligand 3 and CD3, showed promising antitumor activity in a phase 1 trial in patients with previously treated small-cell lung cancer. METHODS: In this phase 2 trial, we evaluated the antitumor activity and safety of tarlatamab, administered intravenously every 2 weeks at a dose of 10 mg or 100 mg, in patients with previously treated small-cell lung cancer. The primary end point was objective response (complete or partial response), as assessed by blinded independent central review according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1. RESULTS: Overall, 220 patients received tarlatamab; patients had previously received a median of two lines of treatment. Among patients evaluated for antitumor activity and survival, the median follow-up was 10.6 months in the 10-mg group and 10.3 months in the 100-mg group. An objective response occurred in 40% (97.5% confidence interval [CI], 29 to 52) of the patients in the 10-mg group and in 32% (97.5% CI, 21 to 44) of those in the 100-mg group. Among patients with an objective response, the duration of response was at least 6 months in 59% (40 of 68 patients). Objective responses at the time of data cutoff were ongoing in 22 of 40 patients (55%) in the 10-mg group and in 16 of 28 patients (57%) in the 100-mg group. The median progression-free survival was 4.9 months (95% CI, 2.9 to 6.7) in the 10-mg group and 3.9 months (95% CI, 2.6 to 4.4) in the 100-mg group; the estimates of overall survival at 9 months were 68% and 66% of patients, respectively. The most common adverse events were cytokine-release syndrome (in 51% of the patients in the 10-mg group and in 61% of those in the 100-mg group), decreased appetite (in 29% and 44%, respectively), and pyrexia (in 35% and 33%). Cytokine-release syndrome occurred primarily during treatment cycle 1, and events in most of the patients were grade 1 or 2 in severity. Grade 3 cytokine-release syndrome occurred less frequently in the 10-mg group (in 1% of the patients) than in the 100-mg group (in 6%). A low percentage of patients (3%) discontinued tarlatamab because of treatment-related adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Tarlatamab, administered as a 10-mg dose every 2 weeks, showed antitumor activity with durable objective responses and promising survival outcomes in patients with previously treated small-cell lung cancer. No new safety signals were identified. (Funded by Amgen; DeLLphi-301 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT05060016.).

BRAF-MEK Inhibition in Newly Diagnosed Papillary Craniopharyngiomas.

BACKGROUND: Craniopharyngiomas, primary brain tumors of the pituitary-hypothalamic axis, can cause clinically significant sequelae. Treatment with the use of surgery, radiation, or both is often associated with substantial morbidity related to vision loss, neuroendocrine dysfunction, and memory loss. Genotyping has shown that more than 90% of papillary craniopharyngiomas carry BRAF V600E mutations, but data are lacking with regard to the safety and efficacy of BRAF-MEK inhibition in patients with papillary craniopharyngiomas who have not undergone previous radiation therapy. METHODS: Eligible patients who had papillary craniopharyngiomas that tested positive for BRAF mutations, had not undergone radiation therapy previously, and had measurable disease received the BRAF-MEK inhibitor combination vemurafenib-cobimetinib in 28-day cycles. The primary end point of this single-group, phase 2 study was objective response at 4 months as determined with the use of centrally determined volumetric data. RESULTS: Of the 16 patients in the study, 15 (94%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 70 to 100) had a durable objective partial response or better to therapy. The median reduction in the volume of the tumor was 91% (range, 68 to 99). The median follow-up was 22 months (95% CI, 19 to 30) and the median number of treatment cycles was 8. Progression-free survival was 87% (95% CI, 57 to 98) at 12 months and 58% (95% CI, 10 to 89) at 24 months. Three patients had disease progression during follow-up after therapy had been discontinued; none have died. The sole patient who did not have a response stopped treatment after 8 days owing to toxic effects. Grade 3 adverse events that were at least possibly related to treatment occurred in 12 patients, including rash in 6 patients. In 2 patients, grade 4 adverse events (hyperglycemia in 1 patient and increased creatine kinase levels in 1 patient) were reported; 3 patients discontinued treatment owing to adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: In this small, single-group study involving patients with papillary craniopharyngiomas, 15 of 16 patients had a partial response or better to the BRAF-MEK inhibitor combination vemurafenib-cobimetinib. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03224767.).

Blinatumomab Added to Chemotherapy in Infant Lymphoblastic Leukemia.

BACKGROUND: KMT2A-rearranged acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) in infants is an aggressive disease with 3-year event-free survival below 40%. Most relapses occur during treatment, with two thirds occurring within 1 year and 90% within 2 years after diagnosis. Outcomes have not improved in recent decades despite intensification of chemotherapy. METHODS: We studied the safety and efficacy of blinatumomab, a bispecific T-cell engager molecule targeting CD19, in infants with KMT2A-rearranged ALL. Thirty patients younger than 1 year of age with newly diagnosed KMT2A-rearranged ALL were given the chemotherapy used in the Interfant-06 trial with the addition of one postinduction course of blinatumomab (15 µg per square meter of body-surface area per day; 28-day continuous infusion). The primary end point was clinically relevant toxic effects, defined as any toxic effect that was possibly or definitely attributable to blinatumomab and resulted in permanent discontinuation of blinatumomab or death. Minimal residual disease (MRD) was measured by polymerase chain reaction. Data on adverse events were collected. Outcome data were compared with historical control data from the Interfant-06 trial. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 26.3 months (range, 3.9 to 48.2). All 30 patients received the full course of blinatumomab. No toxic effects meeting the definition of the primary end point occurred. Ten serious adverse events were reported (fever [4 events], infection [4], hypertension [1], and vomiting [1]). The toxic-effects profile was consistent with that reported in older patients. A total of 28 patients (93%) either were MRD-negative (16 patients) or had low levels of MRD (<5×10-4 [i.e., <5 leukemic cells per 10,000 normal cells], 12 patients) after the blinatumomab infusion. All the patients who continued chemotherapy became MRD-negative during further treatment. Two-year disease-free survival was 81.6% in our study (95% confidence interval [CI], 60.8 to 92.0), as compared with 49.4% (95% CI, 42.5 to 56.0) in the Interfant-06 trial; the corresponding values for overall survival were 93.3% (95% CI, 75.9 to 98.3) and 65.8% (95% CI, 58.9 to 71.8). CONCLUSIONS: Blinatumomab added to Interfant-06 chemotherapy appeared to be safe and had a high level of efficacy in infants with newly diagnosed KMT2A-rearranged ALL as compared with historical controls from the Interfant-06 trial. (Funded by the Princess Máxima Center Foundation and others; EudraCT number, 2016-004674-17.).

Single-Agent Divarasib (GDC-6036) in Solid Tumors with a KRAS G12C Mutation.

BACKGROUND: Divarasib (GDC-6036) is a covalent KRAS G12C inhibitor that was designed to have high potency and selectivity. METHODS: In a phase 1 study, we evaluated divarasib administered orally once daily (at doses ranging from 50 to 400 mg) in patients who had advanced or metastatic solid tumors that harbor a KRAS G12C mutation. The primary objective was an assessment of safety; pharmacokinetics, investigator-evaluated antitumor activity, and biomarkers of response and resistance were also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 137 patients (60 with non-small-cell lung cancer [NSCLC], 55 with colorectal cancer, and 22 with other solid tumors) received divarasib. No dose-limiting toxic effects or treatment-related deaths were reported. Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 127 patients (93%); grade 3 events occurred in 15 patients (11%) and a grade 4 event in 1 patient (1%). Treatment-related adverse events resulted in a dose reduction in 19 patients (14%) and discontinuation of treatment in 4 patients (3%). Among patients with NSCLC, a confirmed response was observed in 53.4% of patients (95% confidence interval [CI], 39.9 to 66.7), and the median progression-free survival was 13.1 months (95% CI, 8.8 to could not be estimated). Among patients with colorectal cancer, a confirmed response was observed in 29.1% of patients (95% CI, 17.6 to 42.9), and the median progression-free survival was 5.6 months (95% CI, 4.1 to 8.2). Responses were also observed in patients with other solid tumors. Serial assessment of circulating tumor DNA showed declines in KRAS G12C variant allele frequency associated with response and identified genomic alterations that may confer resistance to divarasib. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with divarasib resulted in durable clinical responses across KRAS G12C-positive tumors, with mostly low-grade adverse events. (Funded by Genentech; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04449874.).