Tislelizumab plus chemotherapy versus placebo plus chemotherapy as first-line treatment for advanced or metastatic oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (RATIONALE-306): a global, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: The options for first-line treatment of advanced oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma are scarce, and the outcomes remain poor. The anti-PD-1 antibody, tislelizumab, has shown antitumour activity in previously treated patients with advanced oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma. We report interim analysis results from the RATIONALE-306 study, which aimed to assess tislelizumab plus chemotherapy versus placebo plus chemotherapy as first-line treatment for advanced or metastatic oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma. METHODS: This global, randomised, double-blind, parallel-arm, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study was conducted at 162 medical centres across Asia, Europe, Oceania, and North America. Patients (aged ≥18 years) with unresectable, locally advanced, recurrent or metastatic oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (regardless of PD-L1 expression), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, and measurable or evaluable disease per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (version 1.1) were recruited. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1), using permuted block randomisation (block size of four) and stratified by investigator-chosen chemotherapy, region, and previous definitive therapy, to tislelizumab 200 mg or placebo intravenously every 3 weeks on day 1, together with an investigator-chosen chemotherapy doublet, comprising a platinum agent (cisplatin 60-80 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 or oxaliplatin 130 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1) plus a fluoropyrimidine (fluorouracil [750-800 mg/m2 intravenously on days 1-5] or capecitabine [1000 mg/m2 orally twice daily on days 1-14]) or paclitaxel (175 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1). Treatment was continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Investigators, patients, and sponsor staff or designees were masked to treatment. The primary endpoint was overall survival. The efficacy analysis was done in the intention-to-treat population (ie, all randomly assigned patients) and safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03783442. FINDINGS: Between Dec 12, 2018, and Nov 24, 2020, 869 patients were screened, of whom 649 were randomly assigned to tislelizumab plus chemotherapy (n=326) or placebo plus chemotherapy (n=323). Median age was 64·0 years (IQR 59·0-69·0), 563 (87%) of 649 participants were male, 86 (13%) were female, 486 (75%) were Asian, and 155 (24%) were White. 324 (99%) of 326 patients in the tislelizumab group and 321 (99%) of 323 in the placebo group received at least one dose of the study drug. As of data cutoff (Feb 28, 2022), median follow-up was 16·3 months (IQR 8·6-21·8) in the tislelizumab group and 9·8 months (IQR 5·8-19·0) in the placebo group, and 196 (60%) of 326 patients in the tislelizumab group versus 226 (70%) of 323 in the placebo group had died. Median overall survival in the tislelizumab group was 17·2 months (95% CI 15·8-20·1) and in the placebo group was 10·6 months (9·3-12·1; stratified hazard ratio 0·66 [95% CI 0·54-0·80]; one-sided p<0·0001). 313 (97%) of 324 patients in the tislelizumab group and 309 (96%) of 321 in the placebo group had treatment-related treatment-emergent adverse events. The most common grade 3 or 4 treatment-related treatment-emergent adverse events were decreased neutrophil count (99 [31%] in the tislelizumab group vs 105 [33%] in the placebo group), decreased white blood cell count (35 [11%] vs 50 [16%]), and anaemia (47 [15%] vs 41 [13%]). Six deaths in the tislelizumab group (gastrointestinal and upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage [n=2], myocarditis [n=1], pulmonary tuberculosis [n=1], electrolyte imbalance [n=1], and respiratory failure [n=1]) and four deaths in the placebo group (pneumonia [n=1], septic shock [n=1], and unspecified death [n=2]) were determined to be treatment-related. INTERPRETATION: Tislelizumab plus chemotherapy as a first-line treatment for advanced or metastatic oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma provided superior overall survival with a manageable safety profile versus placebo plus chemotherapy. Given that the interim analysis met its superiority boundary for the primary endpoint, as confirmed by the independent data monitoring committee, this Article represents the primary study analysis. FUNDING: BeiGene.

Evaluation of the interest to combine a CD4 Th1-inducer cancer vaccine derived from telomerase and atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a randomized non-comparative phase II study (TERTIO - PRODIGE 82).

BACKGROUND: Several cancer immunotherapies that target the PD-L1/PD-1 pathway show promising clinical activity in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the standard of care in first-line treatment with atezolizumab (anti-PD-L1 therapy) in combination with bevacizumab is associated with a limited objective response rate. Telomerase reverse transcriptase (TERT) activation meets the criteria of oncogenic addiction in HCC and could be actionable therapeutic target and a relevant tumor antigen. Therefore we hypothesized that combining anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy with an anti-telomerase vaccine might be an attractive therapy in HCC. UCPVax is a therapeutic cancer vaccine composed of two separate peptides derived from telomerase (human TERT). UCPVax has been evaluated in a multicenter phase I/II study in non-small cell lung cancers and has demonstrated to be safe and immunogenic, and is under evaluation in combination with atezolizumab in a phase II clinical trial in tumors where telomerase reactivation contributes to an oncogene addiction (HPV+ cancers). The aim of the TERTIO study is to determine the clinical interest and immunological efficacy of a treatment combining the CD4 helper T-inducer cancer anti-telomerase vaccine (UCPVax) with atezolizumab and bevacizumab in unresectable HCC in a multicenter randomized phase II study. METHODS: Patients with locally advanced, metastatic or unresectable HCC who have not previously received systemic anti-cancer treatment are eligible. The primary end point is the objective response rate at 6 months. Patients will be allocated to a treatment arm with a randomization 2:1. In both arms, patients will receive atezolizumab at fixed dose of 1200 mg IV infusion and bevacizumab at fixed dose of 15 mg/kg IV infusion, every 3 weeks, according to the standard of care. In the experimental arm, these treatments will be combined with the UCPVax vaccine at 0.5 mg subcutaneously. DISCUSSION: Combining anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy with an anti-telomerase vaccine gains serious consideration in HCC, in order to extend the clinical efficacy of anti-PD-1/PD-L1. Indeed, anti-cancer vaccines can induce tumor-specific T cell expansion and activation and therefore restore the cancer-immunity cycle in patients lacking pre-existing anti-tumor responses. Thus, there is a strong rational to combine immune checkpoint blockade therapy and anticancer vaccine (UCPVax) in order to activate antitumor T cell immunity and bypass the immunosuppression in the tumor microenvironment in HCC. This pivotal proof of concept study will evaluate the efficacy and safety of the combination of a CD4 Th1-inducer cancer vaccine derived from telomerase (UCPVax) and atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in unresectable HCC, as well as confirming their synergic mechanism, and settling the basis for a new combination for future clinical trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05528952.

Methods for Inclusive Underwriting of Breast Cancer Risk with Machine Learning and Innovative Algorithms.

INTRODUCTION: -Due to early detection and improved therapies, the prevalence of long-term breast cancer survivors is increasing. This has increased the need for more inclusive underwriting in individuals with a history of breast cancer. Herein, we developed a method using algorithm aiming facilitating the underwriting of multiple parameters in breast cancer survivors. METHODS: -Variables and data were extracted from the SEER database and analyzed using 4 different machine learning based algorithms (Logistic Regression, GA2M, Random Forest, and XGBoost) that were compared with Kaplan Meier survival estimates. The performances of these algorithms have been compared with multiple metrics (Log Loss, AUC, and SMR). In situ (non-invasive) and metastatic breast cancer were excluded from this analysis. RESULTS: -Parameters included the pathological subtype, pTNM staging (T: tumor size, N; number of nodes; M presence or absence of metastases), Scarff-Bloom-Richardson grading, the expression of estrogen and progesterone hormone receptors were selected to predict the individual outcome at any time point from diagnosis. While all models had identical performance in terms of statistical metrics (AUC, Log Loss, and SMR), the logistic regression was the one and only model that respects all business constraints and was intelligible for medical and underwriting users. CONCLUSION: -This study provides insight to develop algorithms to set underwriter-friendly calculators for more accurate risk estimations that can be used to rationalize insurance pricing for breast cancer survivors. This study supports the development of a more inclusive underwriting based on models that can encompass the heterogeneity of several malignancies such as breast cancer.

Phase 1b/2 trial of tepotinib in sorafenib pretreated advanced hepatocellular carcinoma with MET overexpression.

BACKGROUND: This Phase 1b/2 study evaluated tepotinib, a highly selective MET inhibitor, in US/European patients with sorafenib pretreated advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC) with MET overexpression. METHODS: Eligible adults had aHCC, progression after ≥4 weeks of sorafenib, and, for Phase 2 only, MET overexpression. Tepotinib was administered once daily at 300 or 500 mg in Phase 1b ('3 + 3' design), and at the recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D) in Phase 2. Primary endpoints were dose-liming toxicities (DLTs; Phase 1b) and 12-week investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS; Phase 2). RESULTS: In Phase 1b (n = 17), no DLTs occurred and the RP2D was confirmed as 500 mg. In Phase 2 (n = 49), the primary endpoint was met: 12-week PFS was 63.3% (90% CI: 50.5-74.7), which was significantly greater than the predefined null hypothesis of ≤15% (one-sided binomial exact test: P < 0.0001). Median time to progression was 4 months. In Phase 2, 28.6% of patients had treatment-related Grade ≥3 adverse events, including peripheral oedema and lipase increase (both 6.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Tepotinib was generally well tolerated and the RP2D (500 mg) showed promising efficacy and, therefore, a positive benefit-risk balance in sorafenib pretreated aHCC with MET overexpression. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02115373.

Recent developments of c-Met as a therapeutic target in hepatocellular carcinoma.

Aberrant c-Met activity has been implicated in the development of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), suggesting that c-Met inhibition may have therapeutic potential. However, clinical trials of nonselective kinase inhibitors with c-Met activity (tivantinib, cabozantinib, foretinib, and golvatinib) in patients with HCC have failed so far to demonstrate significant efficacy. This lack of observed efficacy is likely due to several factors, including trial design, lack of patient selection according to tumor c-Met status, and the prevalent off-target activity of these agents, which may indicate that c-Met inhibition is incomplete. In contrast, selective c-Met inhibitors (tepotinib, capmatinib) can be dosed at a level predicted to achieve complete inhibition of tumor c-Met activity. Moreover, results from early trials can be used to optimize the design of clinical trials of these agents. Preliminary results suggest that selective c-Met inhibitors have antitumor activity in HCC, with acceptable safety and tolerability in patients with Child-Pugh A liver function. Ongoing trials have been designed to assess the efficacy and safety of selective c-Met inhibition compared with standard therapy in patients with HCC that were selected based on tumor c-Met status. Thus, c-Met inhibition continues to be an active area of research in HCC, with well-designed trials in progress to investigate the benefit of selective c-Met inhibitors. (Hepatology 2018;67:1132-1149).

GNS561, a new lysosomotropic small molecule, for the treatment of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.

Among the acquired modifications in cancer cells, changes in lysosomal phenotype and functions are well described, making lysosomes a potential target for novel therapies. Some weak base lipophilic drugs have a particular affinity towards lysosomes, taking benefits from lysosomal trapping to exert anticancer activity. Here, we have developed a new lysosomotropic small molecule, GNS561, and assessed its activity in multiple in vitro intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma models (HuCCT1 and RBE cell lines and patient-derived cells) and in a chicken chorioallantoic membrane xenograft model. GNS561 significantly reduced cell viability in two intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma cell lines (IC50 of 1.5 ± 0.2 µM in HuCCT1 and IC50 of 1.7 ± 0.1 µM in RBE cells) and induced apoptosis as measured by caspases activation. We confirmed that GNS561-mediated cell death was related to its lysosomotropic properties. GNS561 induced lysosomal dysregulation as proven by inhibition of late-stage autophagy and induction of a dose-dependent build-up of enlarged lysosomes. In patient-derived cells, GNS561 was more potent than cisplatin and gemcitabine in 2/5 and 1/5 of the patient-derived cells models, respectively. Moreover, in these models, GNS561 was potent in models with low sensitivity to gemcitabine. GNS561 was also efficient in vivo against a human intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma cell line in a chicken chorioallantoic membrane xenograft model, with a good tolerance at doses high enough to induce an antitumor effect in this model. In summary, GNS561 is a new lysosomotropic agent, with an anticancer activity against intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Further investigations are currently ongoing to fully elucidate its mechanism of action.

Novel transforming growth factor beta receptor I kinase inhibitor galunisertib (LY2157299) in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: We assessed the activity of galunisertib, a small molecule inhibitor of the transforming growth factor beta (TGF-ß1) receptor I, in second-line patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in two cohorts of baseline serum alpha fetoprotein (AFP). METHODS: Patients with advanced HCC who progressed on or were ineligible to receive sorafenib, Child-Pugh A/B7 and ECOG PS ≤1 were enrolled into Part A (AFP ≥ 1.5× ULN) or Part B (AFP < 1.5× ULN). Patients were treated with 80 or 150 mg galunisertib BID for 14 days per 28-day cycle. Endpoints were time-to-progression (TTP) and changes in circulating AFP and TGF-ß1 levels, as well as safety, pharmacokinetics, progression-free survival and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Patients (n = 149) were enrolled with median age 65 years. Median TTP was 2.7 months (95% CI: 1.5-2.9) in Part A (n = 109) and 4.2 months (95% CI: 1.7-5.5) in Part B (n = 40). Median OS was 7.3 months (95% CI: 4.9-10.5) in Part A and 16.8 months (95% CI: 10.5-24.4) in Part B. OS was longer in AFP responders (>20% decrease from baseline, Part A) compared to non-responders (21.5 months vs 6.8 months). OS was longer in TGF-ß1 responders (>20% decrease from baseline, all patients) compared to non-responders. The most common Grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events were neutropenia (n = 4) and fatigue, anaemia, increased bilirubin, hypoalbuminemia and embolism (each, n = 2). CONCLUSIONS: Galunisertib treatment had a manageable safety profile in patients with HCC. Lower baseline AFP and a response in AFP or TGF-ß1 levels (vs no response) correlated with longer survival. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01246986 at ClinicalTrials.gov.

Sunitinib in patients with pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: update of safety data.

AIM: To describe the long-term safety of sunitinib in patients with progressive, well-differentiated, advanced/metastatic pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. PATIENTS & METHODS: Sunitinib- and placebo-treated patients from the Phase III study continued to receive sunitinib (37.5 mg on a continuous daily-dosing regimen) in two open-label extension studies. RESULTS: Median (range) treatment exposure: 30.2 (0.7-269.4) and 87.1 (3.9-319.4) weeks for medium-term (n = 41) and long-term-treated (n = 61) populations, respectively. All patients experienced ≥1 adverse event (AE); 47 (45.6%) reported serious AEs. Common all-causality AEs: diarrhea (63.1%); neutropenia (43.7%); abdominal pain (40.8%). Fifteen (14.6%) patients discontinued treatment due to treatment-related AEs. CONCLUSION: The safety of extended sunitinib treatment was consistent with the known safety profile of sunitinib in pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors.

Pharmacogenomic analyses of sunitinib in patients with pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors.

Aim: Evaluate associations between clinical outcomes and SNPs in patients with well-differentiated pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors receiving sunitinib. Patients & methods: Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards models were used to analyze the association between SNPs and survival outcomes using data from a sunitinib Phase IV (genotyped, n = 56) study. Fisher's exact test was used to analyze objective response rate and genotype associations. Results: After multiplicity adjustment, progression-free and overall survivals were not significantly correlated with SNPs; however, a higher objective response rate was significantly associated with IL1B rs16944 G/A versus G/G (46.4 vs 4.5%; p = 0.001). Conclusion: IL1B SNPs may predict treatment response in patients with pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. VEGF pathway SNPs are potentially associated with survival outcomes.

Phase I/II trial of pimasertib plus gemcitabine in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer.

The selective MEK1/2 inhibitor pimasertib has shown anti-tumour activity in a pancreatic tumour model. This phase I/II, two-part trial was conducted in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (mPaCa) (NCT01016483). In the phase I part, oral pimasertib was given once daily discontinuously (5 days on/2 days off treatment) or twice daily continuously (n = 53) combined with weekly gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m2 ) in 28-day cycles to identify the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of pimasertib. In the phase II part, patients were randomised to pimasertib (RP2D) or placebo plus weekly gemcitabine (n = 88) to investigate progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and safety. The RP2D was determined to be 60 mg BID. PFS and OS outcomes did not indicate any treatment benefit for pimasertib over placebo in combination with gemcitabine (median PFS 3.7 and 2.8 months, respectively, HR = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.58-1.42: median OS 7.3 vs. 7.6 months, respectively). KRAS status did not influence PFS or OS. The incidence of grade ≥3 adverse events was 91.1% and 85.7% for pimasertib/gemcitabine and placebo/gemcitabine respectively, but there was a higher incidence of ocular events with pimasertib/gemcitabine (28.9% vs. 4.8% for placebo/gemcitabine). In conclusion, no clinical benefit was observed with first-line pimasertib plus gemcitabine compared with gemcitabine alone in patients with mPaCa.

Determination of an optimal response cut-off able to predict progression-free survival in patients with well-differentiated advanced pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours treated with sunitinib: an alternative to the current RECIST-defined response.

BACKGROUND: Sunitinib prolongs progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with advanced pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (pNET). Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST)-defined partial responses (PR; classically defined as ⩾30% size decrease from baseline) are infrequent. METHODS: Individual data of pNET patients from the phase II [NCT00056693] and pivotal phase III [NCT00428597] trials of sunitinib were analysed in this investigator-initiated, post hoc study. The primary objective was to determine the optimal RECIST (v.1.0) response cut-off value to identify patients who were progression-free at 11 months (median PFS in phase III trial); and the most informative time-point (highest area under the curve (AUC) by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis and logistic regression) for prediction of benefit (PFS) from sunitinib. RESULTS: Data for 237 patients (85 placebo; 152 sunitinib (n=66.50 mg '4-weeks on/2-weeks off' schedule; n=86 '37.5 mg continuous daily dosing (CDD)')) and 788 scans were analysed. The median PFS for sunitinib and placebo were 9.3 months (95% CI 7.6-12.2) and 5.4 months (95% CI 3.5-6.01), respectively (hazard ratio (HR) 0.43 (95% CI 0.29-0.62); P<0.001). A PR was seen in 19 patients (13%) on sunitinib; the median change in the sum of the lesions (vs baseline) was -12.8% (range -100 to +36.4). Month 7 was the most informative time-point (AUC 0.78 (95% CI 0.66-0.9); odds ratio 1.05 (95% CI 1.01-1.08), P=0.002). Reduction of 10% (vs baseline) achieved the highest sensitivity (50%) and specificity (82%), amongst cut-offs tested. A 10% reduction in marker lesions was associated with improved PFS in the whole sunitinib population (HR 0.55 (95 CI 0.3-0.9); P=0.04); mostly in patients on sunitinib CDD (HR 0.33 (95% CI 0.2-0.7); P=0.005). A 10% reduction in marker lesions (P=0.034) and sunitinib treatment (P=0.012) independently impacted on PFS (multivariable analysis). CONCLUSIONS: A 10% reduction within marker lesions identifies pNET patients benefiting from sunitinib treatment with implications for maintenance of dose intensity and future trial design.

Clinical and Biomarker Evaluations of Sunitinib in Patients with Grade 3 Digestive Neuroendocrine Neoplasms.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Angiogenesis is extensively developed in well-differentiated pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (PanNET) where sunitinib was shown to prolong progression-free survival, leading to nationwide approval. However, clinical experience in patients with grade 3 gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (GEPNEN-G3) remains limited. This prospective phase II trial evaluated potential predictive biomarkers of sunitinib activity in patients with advanced GEPNEN-G3. METHODS: Sunitinib was given at a dose of 37.5 mg/day as a continuous daily dosing until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Evaluation of activity was based on RECIST1.1. Safety was evaluated according to NCI-CTCAE v4. Pharmacokinetics of sunitinib and its main active metabolite SU12662 were evaluated. All tumour samples were reviewed histologically for tumour differentiation. PDGFRß, carbonic anhydrase 9, Ki-67, VEGFR2, and p-AKT were quantified using immunohistochemistry and their expression correlated with response by RECIST1.1. RESULTS: Thirty-one patients were included and 26 had available histological tissue. Six and 20 patients presented well-differentiated tumours (NET-G3) and neuroendocrine carcinoma (NEC), respectively. Eighteen patients responded to sunitinib (4 experienced partial responses and 14 tumour stabilization). A high p-AKT expression correlated with lower response to sunitinib (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.89-0.99, p = 0.04). Safety and PK exposure to sunitinib and SU12662 in these patients were consistent with that reported in PanNET. CONCLUSION: Sunitinib showed evidence of activity in patients with GEPNEN-G3 with expected toxicity profile. In the NET-G3 and NEC groups, 4/6 and 11/20 patients were responders, respectively. High p-AKT expression predicted a lower response to sunitinib. Our study allowed the identification of a potential biomarker of resistance/sensitivity to sunitinib in aggressive GEPNEN-G3.

Efficacy and Safety of Sunitinib in Patients with Well-Differentiated Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumours.

BACKGROUND: In a phase III study, sunitinib led to a significant increase in progression-free survival (PFS) versus placebo in patients with pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (panNETs). This study was a post-marketing commitment to support the phase III data. METHODS: In this ongoing, open-label, phase IV trial (NCT01525550), patients with progressive, advanced unresectable/metastatic, well-differentiated panNETs received continuous sunitinib 37.5 mg once daily. Eligibility criteria were similar to those of the phase III study. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed PFS per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours v1.0 (RECIST). Other endpoints included PFS per Choi criteria, overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: Sixty-one treatment-naive and 45 previously treated patients received sunitinib. By March 19, 2016, 82 (77%) patients had discontinued treatment, mainly due to disease progression. Median treatment duration was 11.7 months. Investigator-assessed median PFS per RECIST (95% confidence interval [CI]) was 13.2 months (10.9-16.7): 13.2 (7.4-16.8) and 13.0 (9.2-20.4) in treatment-naive and previously treated patients, respectively. ORR (95% CI) per RECIST was 24.5% (16.7-33.8) in the total population: 21.3% (11.9-33.7) in treatment-naive and 28.9% (16.4-44.3) in previously treated patients. Median OS, although not yet mature, was 37.8 months (95% CI, 33.0-not estimable). The most common treatment-related AEs were neutropenia (53.8%), diarrhoea (46.2%), and leukopenia (43.4%). CONCLUSIONS: This phase IV trial confirms sunitinib as an efficacious and safe treatment option in patients with advanced/metastatic, well-differentiated, unresectable panNETs, and supports the phase III study outcomes. AEs were consistent with the known safety profile of sunitinib.

Efficacy of a sequential treatment strategy with GEMOX-based followed by FOLFIRI-based chemotherapy in advanced biliary tract cancers.

BACKGROUND: Gemcitabine (GEM)-platinum chemotherapy stands as first-line therapy for patients with recurrent/advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC), yielding progression-free survival (PFS) of 3.4-6.4 months. No standard second-line chemotherapy after GEM-platinum failure exists and data on survival benefit remain limited. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients with recurrent/advanced BTC who received gemcitabine-oxaliplatin (GEMOX)-based chemotherapy followed by 5-fluorouracil-irinotecan (FOLFIRI)-based chemotherapy to evaluate the efficacy of the sequential treatment strategy. Overall survival (OS) and PFS were calculated by Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Fifty-two patients were analyzed, 21 (40%) had intrahepatic, 14 (27%) had hilar/extrahepatic, and 17 (33%) had gallbladder cancer. Median age was 64 years (range 38-79 years). Prior curative intent resection of the primary tumor was performed in 23 (44.2%) patients and GEMOX adjuvant chemotherapy was given in 12 (23.1%) patients. After a median follow-up of 36.3 months, 47 (90.4%) patients completed the treatment strategy. First-sequence GEMOX and second sequence FOLFIRI achieved 4.8 months and 3.2 months median PFS, respectively. The global OS for the sequential chemotherapy was 21.9 months. The sequence of FOLFIRI resulted in a median OS of 8.4 months. CONCLUSION: The sequence of GEMOX-FOLFIRI is a potential treatment strategy for patients with recurrent/advanced BTC.

Reinvention of chemotherapy: drug conjugates and nanoparticles.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Recent advances in nanotechnology have addressed some of the issues related to lack of selectivity and nonspecific toxicities associated with conventional chemotherapy. Nanoparticles are therapeutic carriers that can be fine tuned for specific application and for passive or active tumor targeting. RECENT FINDINGS: Although the nanoparticle field is rapidly expanding, there are to date only six nanoparticle-based drug delivery platforms and two antibody-drug conjugates that are clinically approved for cancer therapy. Here, we review the clinical data of liposomal anthracyclines, nanoparticle formulations of paclitaxel and trastuzumab emtansine. We then briefly comment on efficacy and safety issues of nanoparticles, as well as on the next-generation nanoparticles for cancer therapy. SUMMARY: The emerging development of cancer nanotechnology offers the opportunity of reinvestigating the potential of cytotoxic agents, improving tumor targeting and drug delivery, leading to better safety profile and antitumor activity. Adding specificity to nanoparticles may allow personalization of cancer therapy using chemotherapy.

Transcriptional profiling of pure fibrolamellar hepatocellular carcinoma reveals an endocrine signature.

UNLABELLED: Fibrolamellar hepatocellular carcinoma (FLC) is a rare subtype of liver cancer occurring mostly in children and young adults. We have shown that FLC comprises two separate entities: pure (p-FLC) and mixed-FLC (m-FLC), differing in clinical presentation and course. We show that p-FLCs have a distinct gene expression signature different from that of m-FLCs, which have a signature similar to that of classical hepatocellular carcinomas. We found p-FLC profiles to be unique among 263 profiles related to diverse tumoral and nontumoral liver samples. We identified two distinct molecular subgroups of p-FLCs with different outcomes. Pathway analysis of p-FLCs revealed ERBB2 overexpression and an up-regulation of glycolysis, possibly leading to compensatory mitochondrial hyperplasia and oncocytic differentiation. Four of the sixteen genes most significantly overexpressed in p-FLCs were neuroendocrine genes: prohormone convertase 1 (PCSK1); neurotensin; delta/notch-like EGF repeat containing; and calcitonin. PCSK1 overexpression was validated by immunohistochemistry, yielding specific, diffuse staining of the protein throughout the cytoplasm, possibly corresponding to a functional form of this convertase. CONCLUSION: p-FLCs have a unique transcriptomic signature characterized by the strong expression of specific neuroendocrine genes, suggesting that these tumors may have a cellular origin different from that of HCC. Our data have implications for the use of genomic profiling for diagnosis and selection of targeted therapies in patients with p-FLC.

Phase I dose escalation and pharmacokinetic evaluation of two different schedules of LY2334737, an oral gemcitabine prodrug, in patients with advanced solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: This Phase-I-study aimed to determine the recommended Phase-II-dosing-schedule of LY2334737, an oral gemcitabine prodrug, in patients with advanced/metastatic solid tumors. Pharmacokinetics, cytokeratin-18 (CK18) levels, genetic polymorphisms, and antitumor activity were additionally evaluated. METHODS: Patients received escalating doses of LY2334737 either every other day for 21 days (d) followed by 7 days-drug-free period (QoD-arm) or once daily for 7 days every other week (QD-arm). The 28 days-cycles were repeated until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Standard 3 + 3 dose-escalation was succeeded by a dose-confirmation phase (12 additional patients to be enrolled on the maximum tolerated dose [MTD]). RESULTS: Forty-one patients received QoD- (40-100 mg) and 32 QD-dosing (40-90 mg). On QoD, 3/9 patients experienced dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) on the 100 mg dose (2 × G3 diarrhea, 1 × G3 transaminase increase); 1 additional DLT (G3 diarrhea) occurred during dose confirmation at 90 mg (12 patients). On QD, 1 patient each experienced DLTs on 60 mg (G3 transaminase increase) and 80 mg (G3 prolonged QTcF-interval); 2/7 patients had 3 DLTs on the 90 mg dose (diarrhea, edema, liver-failure; all G3). The MTD was established at 90 mg for the QoD-arm. Seven patients on QoD and 4 on QD achieved SD (no CR + PR). Pharmacokinetics showed a dose-proportional increase in exposure of LY2334737 and dFdC without accumulation after repeated dosing. Significant increases in CK18 levels were observed. Genetic polymorphism of the cytidine deaminase gene (rs818202) could be associated with ≥ G3 hepatotoxicity. CONCLUSIONS: Both schedules displayed linear pharmacokinetics and acceptable safety profiles. The recommended dose and schedule of LY2334737 for subsequent Phase-II-studies is 90 mg given QoD for 21 day.

High c-Met expression in stage I-II pancreatic adenocarcinoma: proposal for an immunostaining scoring method and correlation with poor prognosis.

AIMS: c-Met is an emerging biomarker in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC); there is no consensus regarding the immunostaining scoring method for this marker. We aimed to assess the prognostic value of c-Met overexpression in resected PDAC, and to elaborate a robust and reproducible scoring method for c-Met immunostaining in this setting. METHODS AND RESULTS: c-Met immunostaining was graded according to the validated MetMab score, a classic visual scale combining surface and intensity (SI score), or a simplified score (high c-Met: ≥ 20% of tumour cells with strong membranous staining), in stage I-II PDAC. A computer-assisted classification method (Aperio software) was developed. Clinicopathological parameters were correlated with disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival(OS). One hundred and forty-nine patients were analysed retrospectively in a two-step process. Thirty-seven samples (whole slides) were analysed as a pre-run test. Reproducibility values were optimal with the simplified score (kappa = 0.773); high c-Met expression (7/37) was associated with shorter DFS [hazard ratio (HR) 3.456, P = 0.0036] and OS (HR 4.257, P = 0.0004). c-Met expression was concordant on whole slides and tissue microarrays in 87.9% of samples, and quantifiable with a specific computer-assisted algorithm. In the whole cohort (n = 131), patients with c-Met(high) tumours (36/131) had significantly shorter DFS (9.3 versus 20.0 months, HR 2.165, P = 0.0005) and OS (18.2 versus 35.0 months, HR 1.832, P = 0.0098) in univariate and multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Simplified c-Met expression is an independent prognostic marker in stage I-II PDAC that may help to identify patients with a high risk of tumour relapse and poor survival.

Phase II study of mTORC1 inhibition by everolimus in neurofibromatosis type 2 patients with growing vestibular schwannomas.

Neurofibromatosis type 2 (NF2) is a genetic disorder with bilateral vestibular schwannomas (VS) as the most frequent manifestation. Merlin, the NF2 tumor suppressor, was identified as a negative regulator of mammalian target of rapamycin complex 1. Pre-clinical data in mice showed that mTORC1 inhibition delayed growth of NF2-schwannomas. We conducted a prospective single-institution open-label phase II study to evaluate the effects of everolimus in ten NF2 patients with progressive VS. Drug activity was monitored every 3 months. Everolimus was administered orally for 12 months and, if the decrease in tumor volume was >20 % from baseline, treatment was continued for 12 additional months. Other patients stopped when completed 12 months of everolimus but were allowed to resume treatment when VS volume was >20 % during 1 year follow-up. Nine patients were evaluable. Safety was evaluated using CTCAE 3.0 criteria. After 12 months of everolimus, no reduction in volume ≥20 % was observed. Four patients had progressive disease, and five patients had stable disease with a median annual growth rate decreasing from 67 %/year before treatment to 0.5 %/year during treatment. In these patients, tumor growth resumed within 3-6 months after treatment discontinuation. Everolimus was then reintroduced and VS decreased by a median 6.8 % at 24 months. Time to tumor progression increased threefold from 4.2 months before treatment to > 12 months. Hearing was stable under treatment. The safety of everolimus was manageable. Although the primary endpoint was not reached, further studies are required to confirm the potential for stabilization of everolimus.