Characterization of discordance between mismatch repair deficiency and microsatellite instability testing may prevent inappropriate treatment with immunotherapy.

In the Drug Rediscovery Protocol (DRUP), patients with cancer are treated based on their tumor molecular profile with approved targeted and immunotherapies outside the labeled indication. Importantly, patients undergo a tumor biopsy for whole-genome sequencing (WGS) which allows for a WGS-based evaluation of routine diagnostics. Notably, we observed that not all biopsies of patients with dMMR/MSI-positive tumors as determined by routine diagnostics were classified as microsatellite-unstable by subsequent WGS. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the discordance rate between routine dMMR/MSI diagnostics and WGS and to further characterize discordant cases. We assessed patients enrolled in DRUP with dMMR/MSI-positive tumors identified by routine diagnostics, who were treated with immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) and for whom WGS data were available. Patient and tumor characteristics, study treatment outcomes, and material from routine care were retrieved from the patient medical records and via Palga (the Dutch Pathology Registry), and were compared with WGS results. Initially, discordance between routine dMMR/MSI diagnostics and WGS was observed in 13 patients (13/121; 11%). The majority of these patients did not benefit from ICB (11/13; 85%). After further characterization, we found that in six patients (5%) discordance was caused by dMMR tumors that did not harbor an MSI molecular phenotype by WGS. In six patients (5%), discordance was false due to the presence of multiple primary tumors (n = 3, 2%) and misdiagnosis of dMMR status by immunohistochemistry (n = 3, 2%). In one patient (1%), the exact underlying cause of discordance could not be identified. Thus, in this group of patients limited to those initially diagnosed with dMMR/MSI tumors by current routine diagnostics, the true assay-based discordance rate between routine dMMR/MSI-positive diagnostics and WGS was 5%. To prevent inappropriate ICB treatment, clinicians and pathologists should be aware of the risk of multiple primary tumors and the limitations of different tests. © 2024 The Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland.

Pan-cancer whole-genome analyses of metastatic solid tumours.

Metastatic cancer is a major cause of death and is associated with poor treatment efficacy. A better understanding of the characteristics of late-stage cancer is required to help adapt personalized treatments, reduce overtreatment and improve outcomes. Here we describe the largest, to our knowledge, pan-cancer study of metastatic solid tumour genomes, including whole-genome sequencing data for 2,520 pairs of tumour and normal tissue, analysed at median depths of 106× and 38×, respectively, and surveying more than 70 million somatic variants. The characteristic mutations of metastatic lesions varied widely, with mutations that reflect those of the primary tumour types, and with high rates of whole-genome duplication events (56%). Individual metastatic lesions were relatively homogeneous, with the vast majority (96%) of driver mutations being clonal and up to 80% of tumour-suppressor genes being inactivated bi-allelically by different mutational mechanisms. Although metastatic tumour genomes showed similar mutational landscape and driver genes to primary tumours, we find characteristics that could contribute to responsiveness to therapy or resistance in individual patients. We implement an approach for the review of clinically relevant associations and their potential for actionability. For 62% of patients, we identify genetic variants that may be used to stratify patients towards therapies that either have been approved or are in clinical trials. This demonstrates the importance of comprehensive genomic tumour profiling for precision medicine in cancer.

Myeloid-derived suppressor cells and tolerogenic dendritic cells are distinctively induced by PI3K and Wnt signaling pathways.

Imbalanced immune responses are a prominent hallmark of cancer and autoimmunity. Myeloid cells can be overly suppressive, inhibiting protective immune responses or inactive not controlling autoreactive immune cells. Understanding the mechanisms that induce suppressive myeloid cells, such as myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs) and tolerogenic dendritic cells (TolDCs), can facilitate the development of immune-restoring therapeutic approaches. MDSCs are a major barrier for effective cancer immunotherapy by suppressing antitumor immune responses in cancer patients. TolDCs are administered to patients to promote immune tolerance with the intent to control autoimmune disease. Here, we investigated the development and suppressive/tolerogenic activity of human MDSCs and TolDCs to gain insight into signaling pathways that drive immunosuppression in these different myeloid subsets. Moreover, monocyte-derived MDSCs (M-MDSCs) generated in vitro were compared to M-MDSCs isolated from head-and-neck squamous cell carcinoma patients. PI3K-AKT signaling was identified as being crucial for the induction of human M-MDSCs. PI3K inhibition prevented the downregulation of HLA-DR and the upregulation of reactive oxygen species and MerTK. In addition, we show that the suppressive activity of dexamethasone-induced TolDCs is induced by ß-catenin-dependent Wnt signaling. The identification of PI3K-AKT and Wnt signal transduction pathways as respective inducers of the immunomodulatory capacity of M-MDSCs and TolDCs provides opportunities to overcome suppressive myeloid cells in cancer patients and optimize therapeutic application of TolDCs. Lastly, the observed similarities between generated- and patient-derived M-MDSCs support the use of in vitro-generated M-MDSCs as powerful model to investigate the functionality of human MDSCs.

Limited clinical activity of palbociclib and ribociclib monotherapy in advanced cancers with cyclin D-CDK4/6 pathway alterations in the Dutch DRUP and Australian MoST trials.

The Dutch Drug Rediscovery Protocol (DRUP) and the Australian Cancer Molecular Screening and Therapeutic (MoST) Program are similar nonrandomized, multidrug, pan-cancer trial platforms that aim to identify signals of clinical activity of molecularly matched targeted therapies or immunotherapies outside their approved indications. Here, we report results for advanced or metastatic cancer patients with tumors harboring cyclin D-CDK4/6 pathway alterations treated with CDK4/6 inhibitors palbociclib or ribociclib. We included adult patients that had therapy-refractory solid malignancies with the following alterations: amplifications of CDK4, CDK6, CCND1, CCND2 or CCND3, or complete loss of CDKN2A or SMARCA4. Within MoST, all patients were treated with palbociclib, whereas in DRUP, palbociclib and ribociclib were assigned to different cohorts (defined by tumor type and alteration). The primary endpoint for this combined analysis was clinical benefit, defined as confirmed objective response or stable disease ≥16 weeks. We treated 139 patients with a broad variety of tumor types; 116 with palbociclib and 23 with ribociclib. In 112 evaluable patients, the objective response rate was 0% and clinical benefit rate at 16 weeks was 15%. Median progression-free survival was 4 months (95% CI: 3-5 months), and median overall survival 5 months (95% CI: 4-6 months). In conclusion, only limited clinical activity of palbociclib and ribociclib monotherapy in patients with pretreated cancers harboring cyclin D-CDK4/6 pathway alterations was observed. Our findings indicate that monotherapy use of palbociclib or ribociclib is not recommended and that merging data of two similar precision oncology trials is feasible.

A phase 1 open-label study to assess the relative bioavailability of TAK-931 tablets in reference to powder-in-capsule in patients with advanced solid tumors.

In this phase 1 open-label study, we assessed the relative bioavailability of a prototype tablet formulation of TAK-931, a cell division cycle 7 kinase inhibitor, in reference to the current powder-in-capsule (PIC) formulation in patients with advanced solid tumors for whom no effective standard treatment was available. Adult patients were randomized 1:1 in a crossover fashion to receive one dose of TAK-931 80 mg PIC on Day 1 and one dose of TAK-931 80 mg tablet on Day 3 (or the reverse sequence), followed by TAK-931 50 mg PIC once daily (QD) for 12 days starting from Day 5, before a 7-day rest period (Cycle 0). From Cycle 1, all patients received 50 mg PIC QD on Days 1-14 followed by a 7-day rest period. Twenty patients were enrolled. Median Tmax was achieved approximately 2 h post-dose of TAK-931 80 mg for both tablet and PIC. Geometric mean Cmax, AUC exposures, and T1/2z of TAK-931 were similar for both formulations. Geometric mean Cmax, AUClast, and AUCinf ratios were 0.936 (90% confidence interval [CI]: 0.808-1.084), 1.004 (90% CI: 0.899-1.120), and 1.007 (90% CI: 0.903-1.123), respectively, for TAK-931 tablet in reference to PIC. Discontinuation of TAK-931 due to treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in 1 patient. Four (20%) patients experienced a serious TEAE; none were considered related to TAK-931. Pharmacokinetics and systemic exposure profiles were similar following administration of both formulations, supporting the transition from PIC to tablet in the clinical development of TAK-931. (Trial registration number ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03708211. Registration date October 12, 2018).

The solitary versus supported experience: Care inequality between rare and common cancer patients.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with a rare cancer (RC) often have a more complex disease trajectory than patients with a common cancer. Research involving both patient groups is needed to identify differences and resemblances. In this study, we aimed to explore and compare experiences, needs and quality of life of patients with rare and common cancer throughout the disease trajectory. METHODS: A qualitative focus group study was conducted, including patients with rare and common cancer (n = 25). Participants were purposively selected to reflect heterogeneity of cancer types. A semi-structured topic list was used. Focus groups (n = 4) were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed, using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Three themes were identified emphasizing care inequality between patients with rare and common cancer: (1) The solitary experience: lack of information and support impact the RC patient, (2) Sudden impact, but recognition reduces the common cancer burden, and (3) Absence of psychosocial care requires being empowered as a cancer patient. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with RC are faced with enormous challenges due to the high impact of their solitary experience on their quality of life, while patients with common cancer generally experience social support and recognition alleviating their burden. Centralisation of care for patients with RC is needed and tailored psychosocial care should be provided to overcome inequalities.

Exposure-toxicity relationship of cabozantinib in patients with renal cell cancer and salivary gland cancer.

Cabozantinib is registered in fixed 60 mg dose. However, 46% to 62% of patients in the registration studies needed a dose reduction due to toxicity. Improved clinical efficacy has been observed in renal cell carcinoma patients (RCC) with a cabozantinib exposure greater than 750 µg/L. In our study we explored the cabozantinib exposure in patients with different tumour types. We included RCC patients from routine care and salivary gland carcinoma (SGC) patients from a phase II study with ≥1 measured Cmin at steady-state. The geometric mean (GM) Cmin at the starting dose, at 40 mg and at best tolerated dose (BTD) were compared between both tumour types. Forty-seven patients were included. All SGC patients (n = 22) started with 60 mg, while 52% of RCC patients started with 40 mg. GM Cmin at the start dose was 1456 µg/L (95% CI: 1185-1789) vs 682 µg/L (95% CI: 572-812) (P < .001) for SGC and RCC patients, respectively. When dose-normalised to 40 mg, SGC patients had a significantly higher cabozantinib exposure compared to RCC patients (Cmin 971 µg/L [95% CI: 790-1193] vs 669 µg/L [95% CI: 568-788]) (P = .005). Dose reductions due to toxicity were needed in 91% and 60% of SGC and RCC patients, respectively. Median BTD was between 20 to 30 mg for SGC and 40 mg for RCC patients. GM Cmin at BTD were comparable between the SGC and the RCC group, 694 µg/L (95% CI: 584-824) vs 583 µg/L (95% CI: 496-671) (P = .1). The observed cabozantinib exposure at BTD of approximately 600 µg/L is below the previously proposed target. Surprisingly, a comparable exposure at BTD was reached at different dosages of cabozantinib for SGC patients compared to RCC patients Further research is warranted to identify the optimal exposure and starting dose to balance efficacy and toxicity.

Exposure-response analyses of cabozantinib in patients with metastatic renal cell cancer.

AIM: In the registration trial, cabozantinib exposure ≥ 750 ng/mL correlated to improved tumor size reduction, response rate and progression free survival (PFS) in patients with metastatic renal cell cancer (mRCC). Because patients in routine care often differ from patients in clinical trials, we explored the cabozantinib exposure-response relationship in patients with mRCC treated in routine care. METHODS: Cabozantinib trough concentrations (Cmin) were collected and average exposure was calculated per individual. Exposure-response analyses were performed using the earlier identified target of Cmin > 750 ng/mL and median Cmin. In addition, the effect of dose reductions on response was explored. PFS was used as measure of response. RESULTS: In total, 59 patients were included:10% were classified as favourable, 61% as intermediate and 29% as poor IMDC risk group, respectively. Median number of prior treatment lines was 2 (0-5). Starting dose was 60 mg in 46%, 40 mg in 42% and 20 mg in 12% of patients. Dose reductions were needed in 58% of patients. Median Cmin was 572 ng/mL (IQR: 496-701). Only 17% of patients had an average Cmin ≥ 750 ng/mL. Median PFS was 52 weeks (95% CI: 40-64). No improved PFS was observed for patients with Cmin ≥ 750 ng/mL or ≥ 572 ng/ml. A longer PFS was observed for patients with a dose reduction vs. those without (65 vs. 31 weeks, p = .001). After incorporating known covariates (IMDC risk group and prior treatment lines (< 2 vs. ≥ 2)) in the multivariable analysis, the need for dose reduction remained significantly associated with improved PFS (HR 0.32, 95% CI:0.14-0.70, p = .004). CONCLUSION: In these explorative analyses, no clear relationship between increased cabozantinib exposure and improved PFS was observed. Average cabozantinib exposure was below the previously proposed target in 83% of patients. Future studies should focus on validating the cabozantinib exposure required for long term efficacy.

Lean Body Mass and Total Body Weight Versus Body Surface Area as a Determinant of Docetaxel Pharmacokinetics and Toxicity.

AIM: This study examined whether anthropometric and body composition parameters such as body surface area (BSA), lean body mass (LBM), and total body weight (TBW) are correlated with docetaxel clearance and exposure by analyzing area under the curve. In addition, LBM, TBW, and a fixed dose were compared with BSA as dosing parameters for dose individualization of docetaxel. METHODS: Thirty-six patients receiving docetaxel chemotherapy for breast or metastatic castration-resistant prostate carcinoma were included. Before treatment, LBM was measured using a dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry scanner. Blood samples were collected up to 180 minutes after dosing to analyze docetaxel concentrations and determine individual pharmacokinetic parameters. RESULTS: No significant correlations were found between docetaxel clearance and the anthropometric and body composition variables (BSA, LBM, and TBW). The area under the curve was significantly but poorly correlated with BSA [r = 0.452 ( P = 0.016)] and TBW [r = 0.476 ( P = 0.011)]. The mean absolute percentage error and mean error of simulated dosing based on LBM and fixed dosing were not significantly different from those of BSA. For TBW, only mean absolute percentage error was significantly higher compared with dosing based on BSA (24.1 versus 17.1, P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: There was no clinically relevant correlation between docetaxel pharmacokinetics and the anthropometric and body composition variables BSA, LBM, and TBW. Therefore, dose individualization of docetaxel based on LBM, TBW, or fixed dosing cannot be recommended over BSA-based dosing.

The impact of a 1-hour time interval between pazopanib and subsequent intake of gastric acid suppressants on pazopanib exposure.

Co-treatment with gastric acid suppressants (GAS) in patients taking anticancer drugs that exhibit pH-dependant absorption may lead to decreased drug exposure and may hamper drug efficacy. In our study, we investigated whether a 1-hour time interval between subsequent intake of pazopanib and GAS could mitigate this negative effect on drug exposure. We performed an observational study in which we collected the first steady-state pazopanib trough concentration (Cmin ) levels from patients treated with pazopanib 800 mg once daily (OD) taken fasted or pazopanib 600 mg OD taken with food. All patients were advised to take GAS 1 hour after pazopanib. Patients were grouped based on the use of GAS and the geometric (GM) Cmin levels were compared between groups for each dose regimen. Additionally, the percentage of patients with exposure below the target threshold of 20.5 mg/L and the effect of the type of PPI was explored. The GM Cmin levels were lower in GAS users vs non-GAS users for both the 800 and 600 mg cohorts (23.7 mg/L [95% confidence interval [CI]: 21.1-26.7] vs 28.2 mg/L [95% CI: 25.9-30.5], P = .015 and 26.0 mg/L [95% CI: 22.4-30.3] vs 33.5 mg/L [95% CI: 30.3-37.1], P = .006). Subtherapeutic exposure was more prevalent in GAS users vs non-GAS users (33.3% vs 19.5% and 29.6% vs 14%). Sub-analysis showed lower GM pazopanib Cmin in patients who received omeprazole, while minimal difference was observed in those receiving pantoprazole compared to non-users. Our research showed that a 1-hour time interval between intake of pazopanib and GAS did not mitigate the negative effect of GAS on pazopanib exposure and may hamper pazopanib efficacy.

Phase I Study of Afatinib and Selumetinib in Patients with KRAS-Mutated Colorectal, Non-Small Cell Lung, and Pancreatic Cancer.

LESSONS LEARNED: Afatinib and selumetinib can be combined in continuous and intermittent dosing schedules, albeit at lower doses than approved for monotherapy. Maximum tolerated dose for continuous and intermittent schedules is afatinib 20 mg once daily and selumetinib 25 mg b.i.d. Because the anticancer activity was limited, further development of this combination is not recommended until better biomarkers for response and resistance are defined. BACKGROUND: Antitumor effects of MEK inhibitors are limited in KRAS-mutated tumors because of feedback activation of upstream epidermal growth factor receptors, which reactivates the MAPK and the phosphoinositide 3-kinase-AKT pathway. Therefore, this phase I trial was initiated with the pan-HER inhibitor afatinib plus the MEK inhibitor selumetinib in patients with KRAS mutant, PIK3CA wild-type tumors. METHODS: Afatinib and selumetinib were administered according to a 3+3 design in continuous and intermittent schedules. The primary objective was safety, and the secondary objective was clinical efficacy. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients were enrolled with colorectal cancer (n = 19), non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) (n = 6), and pancreatic cancer (n = 1). Dose-limiting toxicities occurred in six patients, including grade 3 diarrhea, dehydration, decreased appetite, nausea, vomiting, and mucositis. The recommended phase II dose (RP2D) was 20 mg afatinib once daily (QD) and 25 mg selumetinib b.i.d. (21 days on/7 days off) for continuous afatinib dosing and for intermittent dosing with both drugs 5 days on/2 days off. Efficacy was limited with disease stabilization for 221 days in a patient with NSCLC as best response. CONCLUSION: Afatinib and selumetinib can be combined in continuous and intermittent schedules in patients with KRAS mutant tumors. Although target engagement was observed, the clinical efficacy was limited.

A Phase I, First-in-Human Study of GSK2849330, an Anti-HER3 Monoclonal Antibody, in HER3-Expressing Solid Tumors.

BACKGROUND: GSK2849330, an anti-HER3 monoclonal antibody that blocks HER3/Neuregulin 1 (NRG1) signaling in cancer cells, is engineered for enhanced antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity and complement-dependent cytotoxicity. This phase I, first-in-human, open-label study assessed the safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics, and preliminary activity of GSK2849330 in patients with HER3-expressing advanced solid tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with various tumor types were prospectively selected for HER3 expression by immunohistochemistry; a subset was also screened for NRG1 mRNA expression. In the dose-escalation phase, patients received GSK2849330 1.4-30 mg/kg every 2 weeks, or 3 mg/kg or 30 mg/kg weekly, intravenously (IV). In the dose-expansion phase, patients received 30 mg/kg GSK2849330 IV weekly. RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients with HER3-expressing cancers, of whom two expressed NRG1, received GSK2849330 (dose escalation: n = 18, dose expansion: n = 11). GSK2849330 was well tolerated. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed. The highest dose, of 30 mg/kg weekly, expected to provide full target engagement, was selected for dose expansion. Treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were mostly grade 1 or 2. The most common AEs were diarrhea (66%), fatigue (62%), and decreased appetite (31%). Dose-proportional plasma exposures were achieved, with evidence of HER3 inhibition in paired tissue biopsies. Of 29 patients, only 1 confirmed partial response, lasting 19 months, was noted in a patient with CD74-NRG1-rearranged non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). CONCLUSION: GSK2849330 demonstrated a favorable safety profile, dose-proportional PK, and evidence of target engagement, but limited antitumor activity in HER3-expressing cancers. The exceptional response seen in a patient with CD74-NRG1-rearranged NSCLC suggests further exploration in NRG1-fusion-positive cancers. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This first-in-human study confirms that GSK2849330 is well tolerated. Importantly, across a variety of HER3-expressing advanced tumors, prospective selection by HER3/NRG1 expression alone was insufficient to identify patients who could benefit from treatment with this antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity- and complement-dependent cytotoxicity-enhanced anti-HER3 antibody. The only confirmed durable response achieved was in a patient with CD74-NRG1-rearranged lung cancer. This highlights the potential utility of screening for NRG1 fusions prospectively across tumor types to enrich potential responders to anti-HER3 agents in ongoing trials.

The relationship between sunitinib exposure and both efficacy and toxicity in real-world patients with renal cell carcinoma and gastrointestinal stromal tumour.

AIM: Sunitinib is an oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor approved for the treatment of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST). Because of the large interpatient pharmacokinetic variability and established exposure-response and exposure-toxicity relationships in clinical trial patients, therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) seems promising for optimizing sunitinib exposure. We aimed to investigate the relationship between sunitinib exposure and treatment outcome in a real-world patient cohort. METHODS: We performed a retrospective observational cohort study in 53 patients with metastatic RCC and 18 patients with metastatic GIST treated with sunitinib and receiving TDM-guided dosing. Time on treatment - as a surrogate for progression-free survival - in patients who achieved adequate sunitinib exposure was compared with patients who did not. Additionaly, the median sunitinib exposure was compared in patients with or without sunitinib-induced toxicity leading to dose reduction. RESULTS: The median time on treatment in patients with RCC who achieved adequate sunitinib exposure (n = 39) was 32 weeks, compared to 15 weeks in patients who did not achieve adequate sunitinib exposure (n = 12) (P = 0.244). In 29 patients (41%) with toxicity leading to dose reduction, sunitinib sum plasma trough concentration (Ctrough ) until dose reduction was significantly higher compared to patients without toxicity leading to dose reduction (median 60 ng/mL vs 44 ng/mL; P < 0.001) and reduced to comparable levels after dose reduction (44 ng/mL; P = 0.488). CONCLUSION: In our real-world patient cohort, patients with sunitinib-induced toxicity requiring dose reduction had significantly higher sunitinib exposure compared to patients without toxicity. The threshold for toxicity, however, was lower compared to that previously described in clinical trials.

Unmet supportive care needs of patients with rare cancer: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with rare cancers may experience different unmet needs than those with common cancer. The objective of this systematic review was to (1) investigate unmet supportive care needs of rare cancer patients throughout the disease trajectory and (2) identify predictive factors for these unmet needs. METHODS: PubMed, PsycINFO and CINAHL were searched for publications (January 2011 to March 2021) focusing on unmet needs of patients with rare cancer. Two reviewers independently selected studies, extracted data and performed quality assessment. Findings were synthesised. RESULTS: The search yielded 4,598 articles, of which 59 articles met eligibility criteria and 57 were of medium or high quality. Rare cancer patients most frequently reported unmet needs in the healthcare system and information domain (up to 95%), followed by the psychological domain (up to 93%) and the physical and daily living domain (up to 80%). Unmet needs were mainly reported in the posttreatment phase. The most frequently identified predictors were higher anxiety, younger age and higher neuroticism. CONCLUSION: Patients with rare cancer have unmet needs throughout their disease trajectory. Supportive care needs of rare cancer patients should be addressed individually, depending on the rare cancer subdomain and phase of disease and from diagnosis onwards.

Experiences of bereaved family caregivers with shared decision making in palliative cancer treatment: a qualitative interview study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with incurable cancer face complex medical decisions. Their family caregivers play a prominent role in shared decision making processes, but we lack insights into their experiences. In this study, we explored how bereaved family caregivers experienced the shared decision making process. METHODS: We performed a qualitative interview study with in-depth interviews analysed with inductive content analysis. We used a purposive sample of bereaved family caregivers (n = 16) of patients with cancer treated in a tertiary university hospital in the Netherlands. RESULTS: Four themes were identified: 1. scenarios of decision making, 2. future death of the patient 3. factors influencing choices when making a treatment decision, and 4. preconditions for the decision making process. Most family caregivers deferred decisions to the patient or physician. Talking about the patient's future death was not preferred by all family caregivers. All family caregivers reported life prolongation as a significant motivator for treatment, while the quality of life was rarely mentioned. A respectful relationship, close involvement, and open communication with healthcare professionals in the palliative setting were valued by many interviewees. Family caregivers' experiences and needs seemed to be overlooked during medical encounters. CONCLUSIONS: Family caregivers of deceased patients with cancer mentioned life prolongation, and not quality of life, as the most important treatment aim. They highly valued interactions with the medical oncologist and being involved in the conversations. We advise medical oncologists to take more effort to involve the family caregiver, and more explicitly address quality of life in the consultations.

Prediction of clinical benefit from androgen deprivation therapy in salivary duct carcinoma patients.

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is first-line palliative treatment in androgen receptor-positive (AR+) salivary duct carcinoma (SDC), and response rates are 17.6-50.0%. We investigated potential primary ADT resistance mechanisms for their predictive value of clinical benefit from ADT in a cohort of recurrent/metastatic SDC patients receiving palliative ADT (n = 30). We examined mRNA expression of androgen receptor (AR), AR splice variant-7, intratumoral androgen synthesis enzyme-encoding genes AKR1C3, CYP17A1, SRD5A1 and SRD5A2, AR protein expression, ERBB2 (HER2) gene amplification and DNA mutations in driver genes. Furthermore, functional AR pathway activity was determined using a previously reported Bayesian model which infers pathway activity from AR target gene expression levels. SRD5A1 expression levels and AR pathway activity scores were significantly higher in patients with clinical benefit from ADT compared to those without benefit. Survival analysis showed a trend toward a longer median progression-free survival for patients with high SRD5A1 expression levels and high AR pathway activity scores. The AR pathway activity analysis, and not SRD5A1 expression, also showed a trend toward better disease-free survival in an independent cohort of locally advanced SDC patients receiving adjuvant ADT (n = 14) after surgical tumor resection, and in most cases a neck dissection (13/14 patients) and postoperative radiotherapy (13/14 patients). In conclusion, we are the first to describe that AR pathway activity may predict clinical benefit from ADT in SDC patients, but validation in a prospective study is needed.

Impact of optimizing diagnostic workup and reducing the time to treatment in head and neck cancer.

BACKGROUND: Timely and efficient diagnostic workup of patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) is challenging. This observational study describes the implementation of an optimized multidisciplinary oncological diagnostic workup for patients with HNC and its impact on diagnostic and treatment intervals, survival, costs, and patient satisfaction. METHODS: All patients with newly diagnosed HNC who underwent staging and treatment at the Radboud University Medical Center were included. Conventional workup (CW) in 2009 was compared with the fast-track, multidisciplinary, integrated care program, that is, optimized workup (OW), as implemented in 2014. RESULTS: The study included 486 patients with HNC (218 with CW and 268 with OW). The time-to-treatment interval was significantly lower in the OW cohort than the CW cohort (21 vs 34 days; P < .0001). The 3-year overall survival rate was 12% higher after OW (72% in the CW cohort vs 84% in the OW cohort; P = .002). After correction for confounders, the 3-year risk of death remained significantly lower in the OW cohort (hazard ratio, 1.73; 95% confidence interval, 1.14-2.63; P = .010). Total diagnostic costs were comparable in the 2 cohorts. The general satisfaction score, as measured with the Consumer Quality Index for Oncological Care, was significantly better in a matched OW group than the CW group (9.1 vs 8.5; P = .007). CONCLUSIONS: After the implementation of a fast-track, multidisciplinary, integrated care program, the time-to-treatment interval was significantly reduced. Overall survival and patient satisfaction increased significantly, whereas costs did not change. This demonstrates the impact and improved quality of care achieved by efficiently organizing the diagnostic phase of HNC management.

Dose recommendations for anticancer drugs in patients with renal or hepatic impairment.

Renal or hepatic impairment is a common comorbidity for patients with cancer either because of the disease itself, toxicity of previous anticancer treatments, or because of other factors affecting organ function, such as increased age. Because renal and hepatic function are among the main determinants of drug exposure, the pharmacokinetic profile might be altered for patients with cancer who have renal or hepatic impairment, necessitating dose adjustments. Most anticancer drugs are dosed near their maximum tolerated dose and are characterised by a narrow therapeutic index. Consequently, selecting an adequate dose for patients who have either hepatic or renal impairment, or both, is challenging and definitive recommendations on dose adjustments are scarce. In this Review, we discuss the effect of renal and hepatic impairment on the pharmacokinetics of anticancer drugs. To guide clinicians in selecting appropriate dose adjustments, information from available drug labels and from the published literature were combined to provide a practical set of recommendations for dose adjustments of 160 anticancer drugs for patients with hepatic and renal impairment.

Trastuzumab duocarmazine in locally advanced and metastatic solid tumours and HER2-expressing breast cancer: a phase 1 dose-escalation and dose-expansion study.

BACKGROUND: Trastuzumab duocarmazine is a novel HER2-targeting antibody-drug conjugate comprised of trastuzumab covalently bound to a linker drug containing duocarmycin. Preclinical studies showed promising antitumour activity in various models. In this first-in-human study, we assessed the safety and activity of trastuzumab duocarmazine in patients with advanced solid tumours. METHODS: We did a phase 1 dose-escalation and dose-expansion study. The dose-escalation cohort comprised patients aged 18 years or older enrolled from three academic hospitals in Belgium, the Netherlands, and the UK with locally advanced or metastatic solid tumours with variable HER2 status who were refractory to standard cancer treatment. A separate cohort of patients were enrolled to the dose-expansion phase from 15 hospitals in Belgium, the Netherlands, Spain, and the UK. Dose-expansion cohorts included patients aged 18 years or older with breast, gastric, urothelial, or endometrial cancer with at least HER2 immunohistochemistry 1+ expression and measurable disease according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST). Trastuzumab duocarmazine was administered intravenously on day 1 of each 3-week cycle. In the dose-escalation phase, trastuzumab duocarmazine was given at doses of 0·3 mg/kg to 2·4 mg/kg (3 + 3 design) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint of the dose-escalation phase was to assess safety and ascertain the recommended phase 2 dose, which would be the dose used in the dose-expansion phase. The primary endpoint of the dose-expansion phase was the proportion of patients achieving an objective response (complete response or partial response), as assessed by the investigator using RECIST version 1.1. This ongoing study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02277717, and is fully recruited. FINDINGS: Between Oct 30, 2014, and April 2, 2018, 39 patients were enrolled and treated in the dose-escalation phase and 146 patients were enrolled and treated in the dose-expansion phase. One dose-limiting toxic effect (death from pneumonitis) occurred at the highest administered dose (2·4 mg/kg) in the dose-escalation phase. One further death occurred in the dose-escalation phase (1·5 mg/kg cohort) due to disease progression, which was attributed to general physical health decline. Grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events reported more than once in the dose-escalation phase were keratitis (n=3) and fatigue (n=2). Based on all available data, the recommended phase 2 dose was set at 1·2 mg/kg. In the dose-expansion phase, treatment-related serious adverse events were reported in 16 (11%) of 146 patients, most commonly infusion-related reactions (two [1%]) and dyspnoea (two [1%]). The most common treatment-related adverse events (grades 1-4) were fatigue (48 [33%] of 146 patients), conjunctivitis (45 [31%]), and dry eye (45 [31%]). Most patients (104 [71%] of 146) had at least one ocular adverse event, with grade 3 events reported in ten (7%) of 146 patients. No patients died from treatment-related adverse events and four patients died due to disease progression, which were attributed to hepatic failure (n=1), upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage (n=1), neurological decompensation (n=1), and renal failure (n=1). In the breast cancer dose-expansion cohorts, 16 (33%, 95% CI 20·4-48·4) of 48 assessable patients with HER2-positive breast cancer achieved an objective response (all partial responses) according to RECIST. Nine (28%, 95% CI 13·8-46·8) of 32 patients with HER2-low, hormone receptor-positive breast cancer and six (40%, 16·3-67·6) of 15 patients with HER2-low, hormone receptor-negative breast cancer achieved an objective response (all partial responses). Partial responses were also observed in one (6%, 95% CI 0·2-30·2) of 16 patients with gastric cancer, four (25%, 7·3-52·4) of 16 patients with urothelial cancer, and five (39%, 13·9-68·4) of 13 patients with endometrial cancer. INTERPRETATION: Trastuzumab duocarmazine shows notable clinical activity in heavily pretreated patients with HER2-expressing metastatic cancer, including HER2-positive trastuzumab emtansine-resistant and HER2-low breast cancer, with a manageable safety profile. Further investigation of trastuzumab duocarmazine for HER2-positive breast cancer is ongoing and trials for HER2-low breast cancer and other HER2-expressing cancers are in preparation. FUNDING: Synthon Biopharmaceuticals.

Molecular tumour boards and molecular diagnostics for patients with cancer in the Netherlands: experiences, challenges, and aspirations.

Advances in molecular tumour diagnostics and the number of targeted therapies increase rapidly. Molecular tumour boards (MTBs) are designated to interpret these data and provide clinical recommendations. Not all patients with cancer have access to advice of an MTB. We aimed to determine the current status, opportunities, and challenges of the organisation of MTBs in the Netherlands. We interviewed several stakeholders about their experiences with an MTB, using template analysis. Most clinicians and patient representatives underscore the significance of an MTB, because it can stimulate rational treatment options, enrolment in clinical trials, and interdisciplinary knowledge transfer. Health insurance companies and financial managers are concerned about increasing costs. Registries to assess the clinical benefit of MTBs, guidelines on quality control, financial agreements, and logistical resources are lacking. The national organisation of MTBs and a registry of molecular and clinical data are important issues to address.