Dose-escalation study of vemurafenib with sorafenib or crizotinib in patients with BRAF-mutated advanced cancers.

BACKGROUND: BRAF inhibitors are effective in melanoma and other cancers with BRAF mutations; however, patients ultimately develop therapeutic resistance through the activation of alternative signaling pathways such as RAF/RAS or MET. The authors hypothesized that combining the BRAF inhibitor vemurafenib with either the multikinase inhibitor sorafenib or the MET inhibitor crizotinib could overcome therapeutic resistance. METHODS: Patients with advanced cancers and BRAF mutations were enrolled in a dose-escalation study (3 + 3 design) to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and the dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) of vemurafenib with sorafenib (VS) or vemurafenib with crizotinib (VC). RESULTS: In total, 38 patients (VS, n = 24; VC, n = 14) were enrolled, and melanoma was the most represented tumor type (VS, 38%; VC, 64%). In the VS arm, vemurafenib 720 mg twice daily and sorafenib 400 mg am/200 mg pm were identified as the MTDs, DLTs included grade 3 rash (n = 2) and grade 3 hypertension, and partial responses were reported in 5 patients (21%), including 2 with ovarian cancer who had received previous treatment with BRAF, MEK, or ERK inhibitors. In the VC arm, vemurafenib 720 mg twice daily and crizotinib 250 mg daily were identified as the MTDs, DLTs included grade 3 rash (n = 2), and partial responses were reported in 4 patients (29%; melanoma, n = 3; lung adenocarcinoma, n = 1) who had received previous treatment with BRAF, MEK, and/or ERK inhibitors. Optional longitudinal collection of plasma to assess dynamic changes in circulating tumor DNA demonstrated the elimination of BRAF-mutant DNA from plasma during therapy (P = .005). CONCLUSIONS: Vemurafenib combined with sorafenib or crizotinib was well tolerated with encouraging activity, including among patients who previously received treatment with BRAF, MEK, or ERK inhibitors.

Driver network as a biomarker: systematic integration and network modeling of multi-omics data to derive driver signaling pathways for drug combination prediction.

MOTIVATION: Drug combinations that simultaneously suppress multiple cancer driver signaling pathways increase therapeutic options and may reduce drug resistance. We have developed a computational systems biology tool, DrugComboExplorer, to identify driver signaling pathways and predict synergistic drug combinations by integrating the knowledge embedded in vast amounts of available pharmacogenomics and omics data. RESULTS: This tool generates driver signaling networks by processing DNA sequencing, gene copy number, DNA methylation and RNA-seq data from individual cancer patients using an integrated pipeline of algorithms, including bootstrap aggregating-based Markov random field, weighted co-expression network analysis and supervised regulatory network learning. It uses a systems pharmacology approach to infer the combinatorial drug efficacies and synergy mechanisms through drug functional module-induced regulation of target expression analysis. Application of our tool on diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and prostate cancer demonstrated how synergistic drug combinations can be discovered to inhibit multiple driver signaling pathways. Compared with existing computational approaches, DrugComboExplorer had higher prediction accuracy based on in vitro experimental validation and probability concordance index. These results demonstrate that our network-based drug efficacy screening approach can reliably prioritize synergistic drug combinations for cancer and uncover potential mechanisms of drug synergy, warranting further studies in individual cancer patients to derive personalized treatment plans. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: DrugComboExplorer is available at https://github.com/Roosevelt-PKU/drugcombinationprediction. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

Phase 1 study of the combination of vemurafenib, carboplatin, and paclitaxel in patients with BRAF-mutated melanoma and other advanced malignancies.

BACKGROUND: BRAF inhibitors are effective against selected BRAFV600 -mutated tumors. Preclinical data suggest that BRAF inhibition in conjunction with chemotherapy has increased therapeutic activity. METHODS: Patients with advanced cancers and BRAF mutations were enrolled into a dose-escalation study (3+3 design) to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs). RESULTS: Nineteen patients with advanced cancers and BRAF mutations were enrolled and received vemurafenib (480-720 mg orally twice a day), carboplatin (area under the curve [AUC] 5-6 intravenously every 3 weeks), and paclitaxel (100-135 mg/m2 intravenously every 3 weeks). The MTD was not reached, and vemurafenib at 720 mg twice a day, carboplatin at AUC 5, and paclitaxel at 135 mg/m2 were the last safe dose levels. DLTs included a persistent grade 2 creatinine elevation (n = 1), grade 3 transaminitis (n = 1), and grade 4 thrombocytopenia (n = 1). Non-dose-limiting toxicities that were grade 3 or higher and occurred in more than 2 patients included grade 3/4 neutropenia (n = 5), grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia (n = 5), grade 3 fatigue (n = 4), and grade 3 anemia (n = 3). Of the 19 patients, 5 (26%; all with melanoma) had a partial response (PR; n = 4) or complete response (CR; n = 1); these responses were mostly durable and lasted 3.1 to 54.1 months. Of the 13 patients previously treated with BRAF and/or mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase (MEK) inhibitors, 4 (31%) had a CR (n = 1) or PR (n = 3). Patients not treated with prior platinum therapy had a higher response rate than those who did (45% vs 0%; P = .045). CONCLUSIONS: The combination of vemurafenib, carboplatin, and paclitaxel is well tolerated and demonstrates encouraging activity, predominantly in patients with advanced melanoma and BRAFV600 mutations, regardless of prior treatment with BRAF and/or MEK inhibitors.

Phase I study of the combination of crizotinib (as a MET inhibitor) and dasatinib (as a c-SRC inhibitor) in patients with advanced cancer.

Background Both MET and c-SRC are important mediators of cancer progression and there is cross talk between the two molecules. Preclinical studies have demonstrated combination of MET and c-SRC inhibitors is effective in multiple cancer types. Methods We analyzed the safety and efficacy of administering a c-SRC inhibitor (dasatinib) in combination with a MET inhibitor (crizotinib) in a two-arm concurrent phase I study. Arm A consisted of crizotinib fixed at 250 mg twice per day with escalation of dasatinib. Arm B consisted of dasatinib fixed at 140 mg daily with escalation of crizotinib. Endpoints included dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), recommended phase II dose (RP2D), and response (RECIST 1.1). Results We enrolled 61 patients (arm A: 31, arm B: 30). The most common cancers were sarcoma (21%) and prostate cancer (16%). In Arm A, at dose level 2 (DL2), 40% (2/5) experienced DLTs. In the expanded DL1, 21% (4/19) experienced DLTs (all grade 3). In Arm B, at DL2, 50% (2/4) experienced DLTs. In the expanded DL1, 22% (4/18) experienced DLTs (all grade 3). RP2D was determined to be arm A, DL1 (250 mg crizotinib orally twice per day plus 50 mg dasatinib orally daily). Partial response (N = 1) and stable disease for ≥6 months (N = 3) were seen. Conclusions The combination of crizotinib and dasatinib is safe to administer but tolerability is limited given the high rate of adverse events. Responses and durable stable disease were limited. Further precision therapy approach using this specific combination may be difficult given the toxicity.

The oral VEGF receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor pazopanib in combination with the MEK inhibitor trametinib in advanced cholangiocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Cholangiocarcinoma is an aggressive malignancy with limited therapeutic options. MEK inhibition and antiangiogenic therapies have individually shown modest activity in advanced cholangiocarcinoma, whereas dual inhibition of these pathways has not been previously evaluated. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of combination therapy with the oral VEGF receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor pazopanib plus the MEK inhibitor trametinib in patients with advanced cholangiocarcinoma. METHODS: In this open-label, multicentre, single-arm trial, adults with advanced unresectable cholangiocarcinoma received pazopanib 800 mg daily and trametinib 2 mg daily until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) with secondary end points including overall survival (OS), response rate, and disease control rate (DCR). RESULTS: A total of 25 patients were enrolled and had received a median of 2 prior systemic therapies (range 1-7). Median PFS was 3.6 months (95% CI: 2.7-5.1) and the 4-month PFS was 40% (95% CI: 24.7-64.6%). There was a trend towards increased 4-month PFS as compared with the prespecified null hypothesised 4-month PFS of 25%, but this difference did not reach statistical significance (P=0.063). The median survival was 6.4 months (95% CI: 4.3-10.2). The objective response rate was 5% (95% CI: 0.13-24.9%) and the DCR was 75% (95% CI: 51%, 91%). Grade 3/4 adverse events attributable to study drugs were observed in 14 (56%) and included thrombocytopenia, abnormal liver enzymes, rash, and hypertension. CONCLUSIONS: Although the combination of pazopanib plus trametinib had acceptable toxicity with evidence of clinical activity, it did not achieve a statistically significant improvement in 4-month PFS over the prespecified null hypothesised 4-month PFS.

Sleep quality and its association with fatigue, symptom burden, and mood in patients with advanced cancer in a clinic for early-phase oncology clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Limited data exist about sleep quality for patients with advanced cancer in phase 1 clinical trials. Poor sleep quality is often not captured as an adverse event, and its association with fatigue, one of the most frequently reported adverse events, is not documented routinely. This article describes sleep quality and its relation with fatigue, symptom burden, and mood in patients recruited from an early-phase clinic for targeted therapy. METHODS: Sleep, fatigue, symptom burden, and mood were assessed with the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), the Brief Fatigue Inventory, the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI), and the Brief Profile of Mood States, respectively; the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) was determined from medical records. RESULTS: The sample (n = 256) was 51.2% female, 90% had an ECOG PS of 0 or 1, and the mean age was 58 ± 0.8 years. Poor sleepers (global PSQI score > 5) constituted 64% of the sample. In separate multiple regression models, poor sleepers had higher levels of fatigue (P < .001), symptom burden (P < .001), and overall mood disturbance (P < .001) than good sleepers. Also, compared with good sleepers, poor sleepers had greater fatigue-related and symptom-related interference with daily activities (all P values < .001). The MDASI disturbed-sleep item correlated well with the global PSQI score (Pearson's r = 0.679, P < .001), and this suggests its usefulness as a patient-reported outcome screener of sleep quality in early-phase clinical trials clinics. CONCLUSIONS: Poor sleep quality was a significant problem in the current study and was associated with greater fatigue, symptom burden, and mood disturbance. Sleep quality should be routinely assessed in patients with advanced cancer who are participating in early-phase clinical trials. Cancer 2016;122:3401-3409. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Activity of c-Met/ALK Inhibitor Crizotinib and Multi-Kinase VEGF Inhibitor Pazopanib in Metastatic Gastrointestinal Neuroectodermal Tumor Harboring EWSR1-CREB1 Fusion.

Malignant gastrointestinal neuroectodermal tumor (GNET) is an aggressive rare tumor, primarily occurring in young adults with frequent local-regional metastases and recurrence after local control. The tumor is characterized by the presence of EWSR1-ATF1 or EWSR1-CREB1 and immunohistochemical positivity for S-100 protein without melanocytic marker positivity. Due to poor responses to standard sarcoma regimens, GNET has a poor prognosis, and development of effective systemic therapy is desperately needed to treat these patients. Herein, we present a patient with a small bowel GNET who experienced recurrent hepatic and skeletal metastases after a primary resection. Comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) in the course of clinical care with DNA and RNA sequencing demonstrated the presence of an exon 7 to exon 6 EWSR1-CREB1 fusion in the context of a diploid genome with no other genomic alterations. In a clinical trial, the patient received a combination of 250 mg crizotinib with 600 mg pazopanib quaque die and achieved partial response and durable clinical benefit for over 2.8 years, and with minimal toxicity from therapy. Using a CGP database of over 50,000 samples, we identified 11 additional cases that harbor EWSR1-CREB1 and report clinicopathologic characteristics, as these patients may also benefit from such a regimen.

A phase I trial of combination trastuzumab, lapatinib, and bevacizumab in patients with advanced cancer.

PURPOSE: Preclinical data indicate that combination HER2-directed and anti-VEGF therapy may bypass resistance to trastuzumab. A phase I trial was performed to assess safety, activity, and correlates. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Patients with advanced, refractory malignancy were enrolled (modified 3 + 3 design with expansions for responding tumor types). Patients received lapatinib daily for 21 days, and bevacizumab and trastuzumab every 3 weeks. Correlates included HER2 extracellular domain levels (ECD) and single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). RESULTS: Ninety-four patients were treated (median = four prior systemic therapies). The most common related adverse events ≥ grade 2 were diarrhea (n = 33, 35 %) and hypertension (n = 10, 11 %). The recommended phase 2 dose was trastuzumab 6 mg/m(2) (loading = 8 mg/m(2)) and bevacizumab 15 mg/kg every 3 weeks, with lapatinib 1,250 mg daily (full FDA-approved dose of each drug). One patient (1 %) achieved a complete response (CR); eight (9 %), a partial response (PR) (includes breast (n = 7, one of which was HER2 2+ by IHC) and salivary ductal carcinoma (n = 1); and 14 (15 %), stable disease (SD) ≥6 months (total SD ≥ 6 months/PR/CR =23 (25 %). All patients with PR/CR received prior trastuzumab +/- lapatinib. SD ≥ 6 months/PR/CR rate and time to treatment failure (TTF) correlated with elevated baseline HER2 ECD (N = 75 patients tested) but not with HER2 SNPs. CONCLUSIONS: Combination trastuzumab, lapatinib, and bevacizumab was well-tolerated and demonstrated antitumor activity in heavily pretreated patients with advanced malignancy.

Dual antiangiogenic inhibition: a phase I dose escalation and expansion trial targeting VEGF-A and VEGFR in patients with advanced solid tumors.

PURPOSE: Angiogenesis plays a pivotal role in tumor growth and metastasis. Sorafenib, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR), combined with bevacizumab, a monoclonal antibody to vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF-A), would vertically inhibit VEGF/VEGFR signaling. A phase I trial was performed to assess safety, maximum tolerated dose (MTD), and clinical correlates. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Patients with advanced solid tumors refractory to standard therapy were eligible. In cohorts of escalating doses, patients received sorafenib daily for 28 days and bevacizumab every two weeks. Clinical correlates included VEGF polymorphisms. Expansion cohorts of responding tumor types were enrolled. RESULTS: One hundred fifteen patients were treated, and the MTD was identified as 200 mg twice daily sorafenib and 5 mg/kg bevacizumab every two weeks. Median number of prior therapies was four. Twenty-nine patients (25 %) achieved stable disease ≥6 months; six patients (5 %) achieved a partial response (total SD ≥ 6 months/PR=35 (30 %)). 76 patients (66 %) experienced adverse events of grade 2 or higher, most commonly hand and foot syndrome (n = 27, 24 %) and hypertension (n = 24, 21 %). Dose-limiting toxicity occurred in eight patients (7 %), and 45 patients (39 %) required dose reduction for toxicity. Grade 3 and 4 hypertension was associated with longer time to treatment failure, overall survival, and higher response rate. CONCLUSIONS: Combination sorafenib and bevacizumab was well-tolerated and demonstrated antitumor activity in heavily pretreated patients with advanced solid tumors.

Phase I combination of pazopanib and everolimus in PIK3CA mutation positive/PTEN loss patients with advanced solid tumors refractory to standard therapy.

PURPOSE: Combining agents that block both the VEGF and PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathways may be synergistic. We explored a novel dosing schedule to assess safety, toxicity and activity in patients with advanced solid tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with refractory solid tumors were enrolled in a modified 3 + 3 Phase I dose escalation study to determine dose limiting toxicities (DLTs) and the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of a combination of everolimus (mTOR inhibitor) and pazopanib (tyrosine kinase inhibitor with anti-VEGF activity). An expansion cohort selected for patients with molecular alterations in the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway. RESULTS: Sixty-two patients were enrolled; median age was 60 years; 29 were women. The MTD was pazopanib 600 mg every other day (QOD) alternating with everolimus 10 mg PO QOD. DLTs were grade 3 thrombocytopenia and creatinine elevation. Most common toxicities of any grade were thrombocytopenia, transaminitis, leukopenia/neutropenia and lipid abnormalities. Among 52 patients evaluable for response, the clinical benefit rate (CBR) was 27 % (14/52) including four partial responses (PR), and 10 stable disease (SD) ≥6 months. 26 of 45 patients evaluated for molecular alterations had at least one alteration in the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway. CBR in patients with a matched alteration was 27 % (7/26) versus 26 % (5/19) for patients without an alteration (p = 0.764). However, 64% of those with CBR and molecular testing done for alteration in the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway were positive. CONCLUSION: Combination treatment with pazopanib and everolimus was well tolerated and demonstrated activity in solid tumors. Further exploration of this combination and molecular correlation with treatment outcomes is warranted.

A phase 2 cooperative group adjuvant trial using a biomarker-based decision algorithm in patients with stage I non-small cell lung cancer (SWOG-0720, NCT00792701).

BACKGROUND: This cooperative group adjuvant phase 2 trial in patients with completely resected stage I non-small cell lung cancer with tumor diameters measuring ≥ 2 cm was designed to assess the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of assigning patients to therapy or observation using a molecularly based decision algorithm. METHODS: At least a lobectomy and sampling of recommended mediastinal lymph node stations, good Zubrod performance status, adequate organ function, and a formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded tumor specimen were required. Excision repair cross-complementing group 1 (ERCC1) and ribonucleotide reductase M1 (RRM1) were analyzed using immunofluorescence-based in situ automated quantitative image analysis and categorized as high or low using prespecified cutoff values. Patients with high ERCC1 and RRM1 were assigned to observation and all others to 4 cycles of cisplatin and gemcitabine. Feasibility was defined as treatment assignment within 84 days from surgery in > 85% of patients. Secondary objectives were to estimate the 2-year survival. RESULTS: Treatment assignment met the feasibility criteria in 88% of eligible patients (71 of 81 patients). The collective 2-year disease-free and overall survival rates were 80% and 96%, respectively. Protein levels for RRM1 fell within the previously established range, ERCC1 levels were slightly lower than expected, and they were significantly correlated (correlation coefficient, 0.4). The rates of assignment of patients to observation (22%) and chemotherapy (78%) were as expected. CONCLUSIONS: Gene expression analysis for treatment assignment is feasible. Survival results are encouraging and require future validation. Real-time performance of quantitative in situ ERCC1 and RRM1 analysis requires further development.

Phase I dose-escalating study of TAS-106 in combination with carboplatin in patients with solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: TAS-106 was designed to inhibit RNA synthesis by blocking RNA polymerases I, II, and III. METHODS: This was a single-center, open-label, phase I study to identify the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), pharmacokinetics, and biologic effects of the combination of TAS-106 and carboplatin, following a standard 3 + 3 design. This phase I trial was comprised of a regimen of a 60-min IV infusion of carboplatin on day 1 of each 21-day cycle followed by a 24-h infusion of TAS-106, also on day 1 of each cycle. RESULTS: 39 patients were treated (21 male, 18 female, median age 62 years, range 21-80 years). Median number of prior therapies was 4. Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD) was 3 mg/m(2) TAS-106 with AU 4 carboplatin. Dose-limiting toxicities were neutropenia and thrombocytopenia, with and without growth factor support. While no patients achieved a complete or partial response, four patients had stable disease lasting ≥4 months, including one patient each with ovarian, non-small cell lung, basal cell and colorectal cancer. CONCLUSIONS: In summary, the combination of TAS-106 and carboplatin was well-tolerated, and further studies in non-small cell lung and ovarian cancer are warranted to assess the efficacy of this drug combination.

Exploratory study of carboplatin plus the copper-lowering agent trientine in patients with advanced malignancies.

PURPOSE: Preclinical data showed that trientine, a copper-lowering agent, re-sensitized cancer cells to carboplatin through enhanced human copper transporter 1 (hCtr1) -mediated platinum uptake. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We studied carboplatin and trientine in patients (n = 55; 45 who had failed platinum) with advanced malignancies (Phase I, modified 3 + 3 design). RESULTS: The most common cancers were head and neck (n = 13), non-small cell lung (n = 10) and epithelial ovarian (n = 8). The median number of prior regimens was four. No dose-limiting toxicity or treatment-related deaths were observed at doses up to carboplatin AUC 6 given with trientine. Eight patients achieved stable disease (SD) ≥ 6 months (six platinum failures) and one patient with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer, partial response (PR) (total SD ≥ 6 months/PR = 9, 16.4 %). The mean nadir serum copper level in the nine patients with SD ≥ 6 months/PR was 0.55 µg/mL (95 % CI, 0.34-0.75) versus 1.22 µg/mL (95 % CI, 1.02-1.42) (p < 0.001) in 38 tested patients with progression. In patients who maintained their ceruloplasmin (major copper-carrying protein) levels at 5-15 mg/dL (n = 9), the median progression-free and overall survivals were 9.2 and 15.2 months versus 1.9 (p = 0.001) and 5.7 months (p = 0.033) in patients who did not (n = 38), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of a copper-lowering agent with carboplatin was well tolerated and associated with antitumor activity, especially in patients in whom copper and/or ceruloplasmin levels were lowered. Further investigation of this strategy for reversing platinum resistance is warranted.

Barriers to study enrollment in patients with advanced cancer referred to a phase I clinical trials unit.

UNLABELLED: We conducted this retrospective study to identify reasons that patients referred to a phase I clinical trial failed to enroll or delayed enrollment onto the trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Outcome analyses were conducted independently on data collected from electronic medical records of two sets of consecutive patients referred to a phase I clinical trial facility at MD Anderson Cancer Center. Data from the first set of 300 patients were used to determine relevant variables affecting enrollment; data from the second set of 957 patients were then analyzed for these variables. RESULTS: Results from the two sets of patients were similar. Approximately 55% of patients were enrolled in a phase I trial. Patients referred from within MD Anderson were more likely to be enrolled than patients seen originally outside the institution (p = .006); black patients were more likely than white patients to enroll (69% vs. 43%; p = .04). The median interval from the initial visit to initiation of treatments was 19 days. Major reasons for failure to enroll included failure to return to the clinic (36%), opting for treatment in another clinic (17%), hospice referral (11%), early death (10%), and lack of financial clearance (5%). Treatment was delayed for three weeks or more in 250 patients; in 85 patients (34%), the delay was caused by financial and insurance issues. CONCLUSION: Failure to return to the clinic, pursuit of other therapy, and rapid deterioration were the major reasons for failure to enroll; lengthy financial clearance was the most common reason for delayed enrollment onto a phase I trial.

Phase I clinical trial of lenalidomide in combination with temsirolimus in patients with advanced cancer.

BACKGROUND: Lenalidomide, an immunomodulatory and anti-angiogenic drug, and temsirolimus, an mTOR inhibitor, have synergistic anti-cancer effects in preclinical models. We conducted a phase I study of the combination in patients with advanced cancers. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A "3 + 3" study design was used. During the escalation phase, lenalidomide (orally, days 1-21) and temsirolimus (intravenously, once a week) were given at the following respective doses: level 1 (10 mg, 15 mg); level 2 (10 mg, 20 mg); level 3 (20 mg, 20 mg); and level 4 (20 mg, 25 mg) (1 cycle = 28 days). The maximum tolerated dose, dose-limiting toxicity, and response were assessed. RESULTS: Forty-three patients were treated (median age: 58 years (range, 21-80); male/female: 26/17). The most common diagnoses were colorectal cancer (N = 5), sarcoma (N = 5), neuroendocrine carcinoma (N = 4) and adenoid cystic carcinoma (N = 4). Overall, 121 cycles (median: 2) were administered. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed. The maximum tested dose (dose level 4) was used in the expansion phase. Grade 3-4 treatment-related hematologic toxicities (all reversible) were seen in 19 (72%) patients and included neutropenia (N = 12), thrombocytopenia (N = 6), and infection (N = 1). Grade 3 hyperglycemia and Grade 3 hypertriglyceridemia were noted in 21% and 20% of patients, respectively. Of 43 patients, 30 (70%) received prophylactic anticoagulation. There were no thrombotic events. Response was evaluable in 40 patients: one (2.5%) patient had a partial response and 19 (48%) had stable disease (SD), with SD ≥ 6 months in 6 (15%) patients. Tumor types with SD ≥ 6 months were soft tissue sarcoma (2/5; 40%), adenoid cystic carcinoma (1/4; 25%), parotid adenocarcinoma (1/2; 50%), adrenocortical carcinoma (1/3; 33%), and neuroendocrine carcinoma (1/4; 25%). The median progression-free survival duration was 2.2 months (95% CI, 1.5-2.9), and the median overall survival duration was 7.8 months (95% CI, 5.1-10.6). CONCLUSIONS: Lenalidomide and temsirolimus combination therapy was well tolerated and associated with clinical benefit in patients with soft tissue sarcoma, adenoid cystic carcinoma, neuroendocrine carcinoma, parotid carcinoma, and adrenocortical carcinoma.

Phase I study of sapanisertib with carboplatin and paclitaxel in mTOR pathway altered solid malignancies.

Pre-clinically, the mTORC1/2 inhibitor sapanisertib restored sensitivity to platinums and enhanced paclitaxel-induced cancer cell killing. NCT03430882 enrolled patients with mTOR pathway aberrant tumors to receive sapanisertib, carboplatin and paclitaxel. Primary objective was safety and secondary objectives were clinical response and survival. One patient had a dose-limiting toxicity at dose level 4. There were no unanticipated toxicities. Grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events included anemia (21%), neutropenia (21%), thrombocytopenia (10.5%), and transaminitis (5%). Of 17 patients evaluable for response, 2 and 11 patients achieved partial response and stable disease, respectively. Responders included a patient with unclassified renal cell carcinoma harboring EWSR1-POU5F1 fusion and a patient with castrate resistant prostate cancer harboring PTEN loss. Median progression free survival was 3.84 months. Sapanisertib in combination with carboplatin plus paclitaxel demonstrated a manageable safety profile, with preliminary antitumor activity observed in advanced malignancies harboring mTOR pathway alterations.

Tadalafil Enhances Immune Signatures in Response to Neoadjuvant Nivolumab in Resectable Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma.

PURPOSE: We hypothesize that the addition of the phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor tadalafil to the PD-1 inhibitor nivolumab, is safe and will augment immune-mediated antitumor responses in previously untreated squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (HNSCC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a two-arm multi-institutional neoadjuvant randomized trial in any-stage resectable HNSCC (NCT03238365). Patients were stratified at randomization by human papillomavirus (HPV) status. Patients in both arms received nivolumab 240 mg intravenously on days 1 and 15 followed by surgery on day 28. Those in the combination therapy arm also received tadalafil 10 mg orally once daily for 4 weeks. Imaging, blood, and tumor were obtained pretreatment and posttreatment for correlative analysis. RESULTS: Neoadjuvant therapy was well-tolerated with no grade 3 to 5 adverse events and no surgical delays. Twenty-five of 46 (54%) evaluable patients had a pathologic treatment response of ≥20%, including three (7%) patients with a complete pathologic response. Regardless of HPV status, tumor proliferation rate was a negative predictor of response. A strong pretreatment T-cell signature in the HPV-negative cohort was a predictor of response. Tadalafil altered the immune microenvironment, as evidenced by transcriptome data identifying enriched B- and natural killer cell gene sets in the tumor and augmented effector T cells in the periphery. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative nivolumab ± tadalafil is safe in HNSCC and results in more than 50% of the patients having a pathologic treatment response of at least 20% after 4 weeks of treatment. Pretreatment specimens identified HPV status-dependent signatures that predicted response to immunotherapy while posttreatment specimens showed augmentation of the immune microenvironment with the addition of tadalafil.

Outcomes of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer treated in a phase I clinic.

BACKGROUND: The outcomes of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated in phase I clinical trials have not been systematically analyzed. METHODS: We reviewed the records of consecutive patients with advanced/metastatic NSCLC who were treated in the Phase I Clinical Trials Program at MD Anderson from August 2004 to May 2009. RESULTS: Eighty-five patients (51 men, 34 women) treated on various phase I protocols were identified. The median age was 62 years (range, 30-85). The median number of previous systemic therapies was two (range, 0-5). A partial response was observed in eight patients (9.5%) and stable disease lasting >4 months was observed in 16 patients (19%). The median overall survival time was 10.6 months and median progression-free survival (PFS) time was 2.8 months, which was 0.6 months shorter than the median PFS of 3.4 months following prior second-line therapy. Factors predicting longer survival in the univariate analysis were an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (PS) score of 0-1, no prior smoking, two or fewer organ systems involved, a hemoglobin level ≥ 12 g/dL, liver metastases, a history of thromboembolism, and a platelets count > 440 × 10(9)/L. In the multivariate analysis, a PS score of 0-1 and history negative for smoking predicted longer survival. Sixty-two (73%) patients had grade ≤ 2 toxicity, and there were no treatment-related deaths. CONCLUSION: Phase I clinical trials were well tolerated by selected patients with advanced NSCLC treated at M.D. Anderson. Nonsmokers and patients with a good PS survived longer. PFS in our population was shorter in smokers/ex-smokers and patients with a PS score of 2. It is reasonable to refer pretreated patients with a good PS to phase I clinical trials.

Pharmacokinetic study of the phase III, randomized, double-blind, multicenter trial (TRIBUTE) of paclitaxel and carboplatin combined with erlotinib or placebo in patients with advanced Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC).

PURPOSE: To assess the pharmacokinetics and evaluate potential drug-drug interactions between erlotinib, paclitaxel and carboplatin. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: 1,079 previously untreated patients with advanced NSCLC were enrolled and randomized in a phase III trial (TRIBUTE) to receive either erlotinib or placebo in combination with paclitaxel 200 mg/m2 IV over 3 h and carboplatin at a calculated dose to achieve an AUC 6 mg∙min/mL. To determine possible drug-drug interaction with this combination, a subset of 24 (12 erlotinib, 12 placebo) patients were enrolled onto an intensive pharmacokinetic (IPK) substudy group at a single site. All IPK patients received either erlotinib 150 mg/day or placebo-controlled tablets. Analyses were completed using validated analytical methodologies. Non-compartmental modeling was utilized to estimate PK parameters. RESULTS: Complete blood sampling for pharmacokinetic analysis was obtained in 21 of 24 patients. Mean AUC(0-τ) for erlotinib and the OSI-420 metabolite were 29,997 ng∙h/mL and 3,020 ng∙h/mL, respectively. Mean (SD) paclitaxel clearances (L/h/M(2)) were 11.7 (3.4) and 12.7 (6.7) in the placebo and erlotinib treatment groups, respectively. The resultant paclitaxel AUC(0-∞) (ng∙h/mL) was 18,400 (5,300) for the placebo group and 17,800 (5,500) for the erlotinib group. For carboplatin, the mean (SD) clearances (L/h) were 16.8 (3.9) and 16.1 (4.4) for the placebo and erlotinib groups, respectively. The resultant carboplatin AUC(0-∞) (ng/mL∙h) were 49,900 (9,700) for the placebo group and 48,400 (11,900) for the erlotinib group. No significant differences were observed in these paclitaxel or carboplatin pharmacokinetic group comparisons. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of erlotinib to a standard chemotherapy regimen for NSCLC did not alter the systemic exposures (AUC(0-∞)) of paclitaxel (p = 0.80) and carboplatin (p = 0.756) when erlotinib-treated patients were compared to placebo-treated patients. The pharmacokinetics of erlotinib and its metabolite OSI-420 did not appear to be altered by the concomitant administration of paclitaxel and carboplatin.