Joint environmental and social benefits from diversified agriculture.

Agricultural simplification continues to expand at the expense of more diverse forms of agriculture. This simplification, for example, in the form of intensively managed monocultures, poses a risk to keeping the world within safe and just Earth system boundaries. Here, we estimated how agricultural diversification simultaneously affects social and environmental outcomes. Drawing from 24 studies in 11 countries across 2655 farms, we show how five diversification strategies focusing on livestock, crops, soils, noncrop plantings, and water conservation benefit social (e.g., human well-being, yields, and food security) and environmental (e.g., biodiversity, ecosystem services, and reduced environmental externalities) outcomes. We found that applying multiple diversification strategies creates more positive outcomes than individual management strategies alone. To realize these benefits, well-designed policies are needed to incentivize the adoption of multiple diversification strategies in unison.

Effects of agriculture and nature reserves on avian behavior in northwestern Costa Rica.

Behavioral changes are often animals' first responses to environmental change and may act as a bellwether for population viability. Nonetheless, most studies of habitat conversion focus on changes in species occurrences or abundances. We analyzed >14,000 behavioral observations across 55 bird species in communities in northwestern Costa Rica to determine how land use affects reproductive, foraging, and other passive kinds of behaviors not associated with either foraging or reproduction. Specifically, we quantified differences in behaviors between farms, privately owned forests, and protected areas and implemented a novel modeling framework to account for variation in detection among behaviors. This framework entailed estimating abundances of birds performing different behaviors while allowing detection probabilities of individuals to vary by behavior. Birds were 1.2 times more likely to exhibit reproductive behaviors in forest than in agriculture and 1.5 times more likely to exhibit reproductive behaviors in protected areas than in private forests. Species were not always most abundant in the habitats where they were most likely to exhibit foraging or reproductive behaviors. Finally, species of higher conservation concern were less abundant in agriculture than in forest. Together, our results highlight the importance of behavioral analyses for elucidating the conservation value of different land uses.

Efectos de la agricultura y las reservas naturales sobre el comportamiento de las aves en el noroeste de Costa Rica Resumen Los cambios conductuales suelen ser la primera respuesta de los animales ante el cambio ambiental y pueden funcionar como un barómetro para la viabilidad poblacional. Sin embargo, la mayoría de los estudios sobre la conversión del hábitat se enfocan en cambios en la presencia o abundancia de las especies. Analizamos más de 14,000 observaciones conductuales en las comunidades de 55 especies de aves del noroeste de Costa Rica para determinar cómo el uso de suelo afectó el comportamiento reproductivo, de forrajeo y otras formas pasivas no asociadas con las dos anteriores. En específico, cuantificamos las diferencias en el comportamiento entre granjas, bosques de propiedad privada y áreas protegidas e implementamos un marco novedoso de modelado para justificar la variación en la detección entre los comportamientos. Este marco implicó estimar la abundancia de aves que realizaban diferentes comportamientos mientras permitía que variaran las probabilidades de detección de individuos según el comportamiento. Fue 1.2 veces más probable que las aves exhibieran comportamiento reproductivo en el bosque que en las zonas agrícolas y 1.5 veces más probable que exhibieran estos comportamientos en las áreas protegidas que en los bosques privados. Las especies no siempre fueron las más abundantes en los hábitats en donde era más probable que exhibieran comportamientos reproductivos o de forrajeo. Por último, las especies de mayor preocupación para la conservación fueron menos abundantes en las zonas agrícolas que en los bosques. En conjunto, nuestros resultados resaltan la importancia del análisis conductual para ilustrar el valor de conservación de los diferentes usos de suelo.

Leveraging satellite observations to reveal ecological drivers of pest densities across landscapes.

Landscape ecologists have long suggested that pest abundances increase in simplified, monoculture landscapes. However, tests of this theory often fail to predict pest population sizes in real-world agricultural fields. These failures may arise not only from variation in pest ecology, but also from the widespread use of categorical land-use maps that do not adequately characterize habitat-availability for pests. We used 1163 field-year observations of Lygus hesperus (Western Tarnished Plant Bug) densities in California cotton fields to determine whether integrating remotely-sensed metrics of vegetation productivity and phenology into pest models could improve pest abundance analysis and prediction. Because L. hesperus often overwinters in non-crop vegetation, we predicted that pest abundances would peak on farms surrounded by more non-crop vegetation, especially when the non-crop vegetation is initially productive but then dries down early in the year, causing the pest to disperse into cotton fields. We found that the effect of non-crop habitat on pest densities varied across latitudes, with a positive relationship in the north and a negative one in the south. Aligning with our hypotheses, models predicted that L. hesperus densities were 35 times higher on farms surrounded by high versus low productivity non-crop vegetation (EVI area 350 vs. 50) and 2.8 times higher when dormancy occurred earlier versus later in the year (May 15 vs. June 30). Despite these strong and significant effects, we found that integrating these remote-sensing variables into land-use models only marginally improved pest density predictions in cotton compared to models with categorical land cover metrics alone. Together, our work suggests that the remote sensing variables analyzed here can advance our understanding of pest ecology, but not yet substantively increase the accuracy of pest abundance predictions.

Simultaneous submission of seven CTSA proposals: UM1, K12, R25, T32-predoctoral, T32-postdoctoral, and RC2: strategies, evaluation, and lessons learned.

Translation is the process of turning observations in the research laboratory, clinic, and community into interventions that improve people's health. The Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) program is a National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS) initiative to advance translational science and research. Currently, 64 "CTSA hubs" exist across the nation. Since 2006, the Houston-based Center for Clinical Translational Sciences (CCTS) has assembled a well-integrated, high-impact hub in Texas that includes six partner institutions within the state, encompassing ∼23,000 sq. miles and over 16 million residents. To achieve the NCATS goal of "more treatments for all people more quickly," the CCTS promotes diversity and inclusion by integrating underrepresented populations into clinical studies, workforce training, and career development. In May 2023, we submitted the UM1 application and six "companion" proposals: K12, R25, T32-Predoctoral, T32-Postdoctoral, and RC2 (two applications). In October 2023, we received priority scores for the UM1 (22), K12 (25), T32-Predoctoral (20), and T32-Postdoctoral (23), which historically fall within the NCATS funding range. This report describes the grant preparation and submission approach, coupled with data from an internal survey designed to assimilate feedback from principal investigators, writers, reviewers, and administrative specialists. Herein, we share the challenges faced, the approaches developed, and the lessons learned.

Phase I study of sapanisertib (CB-228/TAK-228/MLN0128) in combination with ziv-aflibercept in patients with advanced solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: Sapanisertib is a potent ATP-competitive, dual inhibitor of mTORC1/2. Ziv-aflibercept is a recombinant fusion protein comprising human VEGF receptor extracellular domains fused to human immunoglobulin G1. HIF-1α inhibition in combination with anti-angiogenic therapy is a promising anti-tumor strategy. This Phase 1 dose-escalation/expansion study assessed safety/ tolerability of sapanisertib in combination with ziv-aflibercept in advanced solid tumors. METHODS: Fifty-five patients with heavily pre-treated advanced metastatic solid tumors resistant or refractory to standard treatment received treatment on a range of dose levels. RESULTS: Fifty-five patients were enrolled and treated across a range of dose levels. Forty were female (73%), median age was 62 (range: 21-79), and ECOG PS was 0 (9, 16%) or 1 (46, 84%). Most common tumor types included ovarian (8), colorectal (8), sarcoma (8), breast (3), cervical (4), and endometrial (4). Median number of prior lines of therapy was 4 (range 2-11). Sapanisertib 4 mg orally 3 days on and 4 days off plus 3 mg/kg ziv-aflibercept IV every 2 weeks on a 28-day cycle was defined as the maximum tolerated dose. Most frequent treatment-related grade ≥2 adverse events included hypertension, fatigue, anorexia, hypertriglyceridemia, diarrhea, nausea, mucositis, and serum lipase increase. There were no grade 5 events. In patients with evaluable disease (n = 50), 37 patients (74%) achieved stable disease (SD) as best response, two patients (4%) achieved a confirmed partial response (PR); disease control rate (DCR) (CR + SD + PR) was 78%. CONCLUSION: The combination of sapanisertib and ziv-aflibercept was generally tolerable and demonstrated anti-tumor activity in heavily pre-treated patients with advanced malignancies.

First-In-Human Phase I Study of Tinengotinib (TT-00420), a Multiple Kinase Inhibitor, as a Single Agent in Patients With Advanced Solid Tumors.

PURPOSE: This first-in-human phase I dose-escalation study evaluated the safety, pharmacokinetics, and efficacy of tinengotinib (TT-00420), a multi-kinase inhibitor targeting fibroblast growth factor receptors 1-3 (FGFRs 1-3), Janus kinase 1/2, vascular endothelial growth factor receptors, and Aurora A/B, in patients with advanced solid tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients received tinengotinib orally daily in 28-day cycles. Dose escalation was guided by Bayesian modeling using escalation with overdose control. The primary objective was to assess dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), maximum tolerated dose (MTD), and dose recommended for dose expansion (DRDE). Secondary objectives included pharmacokinetics and efficacy. RESULTS: Forty-eight patients were enrolled (dose escalation, n = 40; dose expansion, n = 8). MTD was not reached; DRDE was 12 mg daily. DLTs were palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome (8 mg, n = 1) and hypertension (15 mg, n = 2). The most common treatment-related adverse event was hypertension (50.0%). In 43 response-evaluable patients, 13 (30.2%) achieved partial response (PR; n = 7) or stable disease (SD) ≥ 24 weeks (n = 6), including 4/11 (36.4%) with FGFR2 mutations/fusions and cholangiocarcinoma (PR n = 3; SD ≥ 24 weeks n = 1), 3/3 (100.0%) with hormone receptor (HR)-positive/HER2-negative breast cancer (PR n = 2; SD ≥ 24 weeks n = 1), 2/5 (40.0%) with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC; PR n = 1; SD ≥ 24 weeks n = 1), and 1/1 (100.0%) with castrate-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC; PR). Four of 12 patients (33.3%; HR-positive/HER2-negative breast cancer, TNBC, prostate cancer, and cholangiocarcinoma) treated at DRDE had PRs. Tinengotinib's half-life was 28-34 hours. CONCLUSIONS: Tinengotinib was well tolerated with favorable pharmacokinetic characteristics. Preliminary findings indicated potential clinical benefit in FGFR inhibitor-refractory cholangiocarcinoma, HER2-negative breast cancer (including TNBC), and CRPC. Continued evaluation of tinengotinib is warranted in phase II trials.

Phase 1/2 trial of avelumab combined with utomilumab (4-1BB agonist), PF-04518600 (OX40 agonist), or radiotherapy in patients with advanced gynecologic malignancies.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint blockade has shown mixed results in advanced/recurrent gynecologic malignancies. Efficacy may be improved through costimulation with OX40 and 4-1BB agonists. The authors sought to evaluate the safety and efficacy of avelumab combined with utomilumab (a 4-1BB agonist), PF-04518600 (an OX40 agonist), and radiotherapy in patients with recurrent gynecologic malignancies. METHODS: The primary end point in this six-arm, phase 1/2 trial was safety of the combination regimens. Secondary end points included the objective response rate (ORR) according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors and immune-related Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, the disease control rate (DCR), the duration of response, progression-free survival, and overall survival. RESULTS: Forty patients were included (35% with cervical cancer, 30% with endometrial cancer, and 35% with ovarian cancer). Most patients (n = 33; 83%) were enrolled in arms A-C (no radiation). Among 35 patients who were evaluable for efficacy, the ORR was 2.9%, and the DCR was 37.1%, with a median duration of stable disease of 5.4 months (interquartile range, 4.1-7.3 months). Patients with cervical cancer in arm A (avelumab and utomilumab; n = 9 evaluable patients) achieved an ORR of 11% and a DCR of 78%. The median progression-free survival was 2.1 months (95% CI, 1.8-3.5 months), and overall survival was 9.4 months (95% CI, 5.6-11.9 months). No dose-limiting toxicities or grade 3-5 immune-related adverse events were observed. CONCLUSIONS: The findings from this trial highlight that, in heavily pretreated patients with gynecologic cancer, even multidrug regimens targeting multiple immunologic pathways, although safe, did not produce significant responses. A DCR of 78% in patients with cervical cancer who received avelumab and utomilumab indicates that further research on this combination in select patients may be warranted.

Maximum temperatures determine the habitat affiliations of North American mammals.

Addressing the ongoing biodiversity crisis requires identifying the winners and losers of global change. Species are often categorized based on how they respond to habitat loss; for example, species restricted to natural environments, those that most often occur in anthropogenic habitats, and generalists that do well in both. However, species might switch habitat affiliations across time and space: an organism may venture into human-modified areas in benign regions but retreat into thermally buffered forested habitats in areas with high temperatures. Here, we apply community occupancy models to a large-scale camera trapping dataset with 29 mammal species distributed over 2,485 sites across the continental United States, to ask three questions. First, are species' responses to forest and anthropogenic habitats consistent across continental scales? Second, do macroclimatic conditions explain spatial variation in species responses to land use? Third, can species traits elucidate which taxa are most likely to show climate-dependent habitat associations? We found that all species exhibited significant spatial variation in how they respond to land-use, tending to avoid anthropogenic areas and increasingly use forests in hotter regions. In the hottest regions, species occupancy was 50% higher in forested compared to open habitats, whereas in the coldest regions, the trend reversed. Larger species with larger ranges, herbivores, and primary predators were more likely to change their habitat affiliations than top predators, which consistently affiliated with high forest cover. Our findings suggest that climatic conditions influence species' space-use and that maintaining forest cover can help protect mammals from warming climates.

Agriculture and hot temperatures interactively erode the nest success of habitat generalist birds across the United States.

Habitat conversion and climate change are fundamental drivers of biodiversity loss worldwide but are often analyzed in isolation. We used a continental-scale, decades-long database of more than 150,000 bird nesting attempts to explore how extreme heat affects avian reproduction in forests, grasslands, and agricultural and developed areas across the US. We found that in forests, extreme heat increased nest success, but birds nesting in agricultural settings were much less likely to successfully fledge young when temperatures reached anomalously high levels. Species that build exposed cup nests and species of higher conservation concern were particularly vulnerable to maximum temperature anomalies in agricultural settings. Finally, future projections suggested that ongoing climate change may exacerbate the negative effects of habitat conversion on avian nesting success, thereby compromising conservation efforts in human-dominated landscapes.

Discordance of HER2 Expression and/or Amplification on Repeat Testing.

We sought to assess discordance of HER2 status in patients with HER2-amplified/expressing solid tumors who underwent reevaluation of HER2 status. Patients with metastatic solid tumors and HER2 expression by IHC or amplification by FISH/next-generation sequencing on local testing underwent central HER2 IHC/FISH testing with either archival or fresh biopsies and were evaluated for discordance in HER2 status. 70 patients (12 cancer types) underwent central HER2 reevaluation, including 57 (81.4%) with a new biopsy. In 30 patients with HER2 3+ on local IHC, 21 (70.0%) were 3+, 5 (16.7%) were 2+, 2 (6.7%) were 1+, and 2 (6.7%) had 0 HER2 expression on central IHC. In 15 patients whose cancers were 2+ on local IHC, 2 (13.3%) were 3+, 5 (33.3%) were 2+, 7 (46.7%) were 1+, and 1 (6.7%) had 0 HER2 expression on central IHC. HER2 discordance was seen in 16 of 52 (30.8%) of patients with HER2 overexpression/amplification who underwent a new image-guided biopsy. Discordance was observed in 10 (33.3%) of 30 patients who received intervening HER2-targeted therapy and in 6 (23.8%) of 22 patients who did not. In the 8 patients who had central HER2 assessment from the same archival block used for local testing, none were discordant. Discordance of HER2 status is common in patients with tumors previously identified as HER2-expressing, especially in patients with HER2 2+ tumors. Repeat biomarker evaluation may have value when considering HER2-targeted therapies.

A Phase I Trial of Bevacizumab and Temsirolimus in Combination With Valproic Acid in Advanced Solid Tumors.

BACKGROUND: Preclinical models suggest synergy between anti-angiogenesis therapy, mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR), and histone deacetylase inhibitors to promote anticancer activity. METHODS: This phase I study enrolled 47 patients between April 2012 and 2018 and determined safety, maximum tolerated dose (MTD), and dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) when combining bevacizumab, temsirolimus, and valproic acid in patients with advanced cancer. RESULTS: Median age of enrolled patients was 56 years. Patients were heavily pretreated with a median of 4 lines of prior therapy. Forty-five patients (95.7%) experienced one or more treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs). Grade 3 TRAEs were lymphopenia (14.9%), thrombocytopenia (8.5%), and mucositis (6.4%). Grade 4 TRAEs included lymphopenia (2.1%) and CNS cerebrovascular ischemia (2.1%). Six patients developed DLTs across 10 dose levels with grade 3 infection, rash, mucositis, bowel perforation, elevated lipase, and grade 4 cerebrovascular ischemia. The MTD was dose level 9 (bevacizumab 5 mg/kg days 1 and 15 intravenously (IV) plus temsirolimus 25 mg days 1, 8, 15, and 22 IV and valproic acid 5 mg/kg on days 1-7 and 15-21 per orally (PO)). Objective response rate (ORR) was 7.9% with confirmed partial response (PRs) in 3 patients (one each in parotid gland, ovarian, and vaginal cancers). Stable disease (SD) ≥+6 months was seen in 5 patients (13.1%). Clinical benefit state (CBR: PR + SD ≥+6 months) was 21%. CONCLUSION: Combination therapy with bevacizumab, temsirolimus, and valproic acid was feasible, but there were numerous toxicities, which will require careful management for future clinical development (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01552434).

A phase I trial of the pan-ERBB inhibitor neratinib combined with the MEK inhibitor trametinib in patients with advanced cancer with EGFR mutation/amplification, HER2 mutation/amplification, HER3/4 mutation or KRAS mutation.

PURPOSE: Aberrant alterations of ERBB receptor tyrosine kinases lead to tumorigenesis. Single agent therapy targeting EGFR or HER2 has shown clinical successes, but drug resistance often develops due to aberrant or compensatory mechanisms. Herein, we sought to determine the feasibility and safety of neratinib and trametinib in patients with EGFR mutation/amplification, HER2 mutation/amplification, HER3/4 mutation and KRAS mutation. METHODS: Patients with actionable somatic mutations or amplifications in ERBB genes or actionable KRAS mutations were enrolled to receive neratinib and trametinib in this phase I dose escalation trial. The primary endpoint was determination of the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and dose-limiting toxicity (DLT). Secondary endpoints included pharmacokinetic analysis and preliminary anti-tumor efficacy. RESULTS: Twenty patients were enrolled with a median age of 50.5 years and a median of 3 lines of prior therapy. Grade 3 treatment-related toxicities included: diarrhea (25%), vomiting (10%), nausea (5%), fatigue (5%) and malaise (5%). The MTD was dose level (DL) minus 1 (neratinib 160 mg daily with trametinib 1 mg, 5 days on and 2 days off) given 2 DLTs of grade 3 diarrhea in DL1 (neratinib 160 mg daily with trametinib 1 mg daily). The treatment-related toxicities of DL1 included: diarrhea (100%), nausea (55.6%) and rash (55.6%). Pharmacokinetic data showed trametinib clearance was significantly reduced leading to high drug exposures of trametinib. Two patients achieved stable disease (SD) ≥ 4 months. CONCLUSION: Neratinib and trametinib combination was toxic and had limited clinical efficacy. This may be due to suboptimal drug dosing given drug-drug interactions. TRIAL REGISTRATION ID: NCT03065387.

Safety, tolerability, and clinical activity of selinexor in combination with pembrolizumab in treatment of metastatic non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: In lung cancer, overexpression of nuclear export proteins can result in inactivation of critical tumor suppressor proteins and cell-cycle regulators. Selective suppression of nuclear export proteins has immunomodulatory activities. Here, clinical safety and early efficacy data are presented on the combination of pembrolizumab and an oral selective nuclear export inhibitor, selinexor, for the treatment of metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC). METHODS: The primary objective of this prospective investigator-initiated study was to determine the safety and tolerability of selinexor in combination with pembrolizumab in patients with mNSCLC. Secondary objectives included determination of objective tumor response rate, disease control rate, and progression-free survival duration. RESULTS: A total of 17 patients were included in the final analysis. Fifteen (88%) received more than two lines of prior systemic therapy and 10 (59%) had prior exposure to anti-PD-1/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) therapy. The median age was 67.5 years. Ten patients had grade ≥3 adverse events related to selinexor treatment. Responses to treatment occurred in patients who did and did not undergo previous anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy and in patients with activating driver mutations. The median overall survival and progression-free survival were 11.4 months (95% CI, 3.4-19.8 months) and 3.0 months (95% CI, 1.7-5.7 months), respectively. The overall response rate was 18% and the 6-month disease control rate was 24%. CONCLUSIONS: Selinexor in combination with pembrolizumab demonstrated promising antitumor activity in patients with mNSCLC, including those who had previously received anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy. The therapy-related toxic effects were consistent with the prior safety data for both drugs, and no overlapping toxic effects were observed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02419495. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: New strategies to prevent or reverse resistance to immune checkpoint inhibitors are under investigation. Selective inhibitors of nuclear export proteins, such as selinexor, can induce restoration of tumor-suppressing pathways and induce potent immunomodulatory activities. This article contains the clinical safety and early efficacy data on the combination of pembrolizumab and selinexor in treatment of metastatic non-small cell lung cancer.

Phase 1b study of combined selinexor and eribulin for the treatment of advanced solid tumors and triple-negative breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Selinexor (KPT-330) is a potent inhibitor of exportin 1 (XPO1), in turn inhibiting tumor growth. Selinexor enhances the antitumor efficacy of eribulin in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) in vitro and in vivo. Given the unmet medical need in TNBC and sarcoma, the authors explored the safety and efficacy of this combination. METHODS: The authors conducted a phase 1b trial of combined selinexor and eribulin using a 3 + 3 dose-escalation design in patients who had advanced solid tumors and in those who had TNBC in a dose-expansion cohort. RESULTS: Patients with TNBC (N = 19), sarcoma (N = 9), and other cancers (N = 3) were enrolled in the dose-escalation cohort (N = 10) and in the dose-expansion cohort (N = 21). The median number lines of prior therapy received was four (range, from one to seven prior lines). The most common treatment-related adverse events for selinexor were nausea (77%), leukopenia (77%), anemia (68%), neutropenia (68%), and fatigue (48%). One dose-limiting toxicity occurred at the first dose level with prolonged grade 3 neutropenia. The recommended phase 2 dose was 80 mg of selinexor orally once per week and 1 mg/m2 eribulin on days 1 and 8 intravenously every 3 weeks. The objective response rate (ORR) was 10% in three patients. In the dose-escalation cohort, the ORR was 10%, whereas six patients with had stable disease. In the TNBC dose-expansion cohort (n = 18), ORR was 11%, and there were two confirmed partial responses with durations of 10.8 and 19.1 months (ongoing). CONCLUSIONS: Selinexor and eribulin had an acceptable toxicity profile and modest overall efficacy with durable responses in select patients. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Effective therapies for advanced, triple-negative breast cancer and sarcoma represent an unmet need. Exportin 1 is associated with the transport of cancer-related proteins. Preclinical studies have demonstrated tumor growth inhibition and enhanced tumor sensitivity in patients who receive selinexor combined with eribulin. In this phase 1b study, the authors evaluated the safety profile and clinical activity of the combination of selinexor, a potent oral inhibitor of exportin 1, and eribulin in patients with advanced cancers enriched for triple-negative breast cancer or sarcoma. The combination was well tolerated; most adverse events were mild or moderate, reversible, and managed with dose modifications or growth factor support. The combination of selinexor and eribulin produced an antitumor response, particularly in some patients with triple-negative breast cancer. This work lays the foundation for prospective investigations of the role of selinexor and eribulin in the treatment of triple-negative breast cancer.

Impact of Biomarker-Matched Therapies on Outcomes in Patients with Sarcoma Enrolled in Early-Phase Clinical Trials (SAMBA 101).

PURPOSE: Developing new therapeutics for any of the more than 100 sarcoma subtypes presents a challenge. After progression from standard therapies, patients with sarcoma may be referred for enrollment in early-phase trials. This study aimed to investigate whether enrollment in biomarker-matched early-phase clinical trials leads to better outcomes for patients with advanced sarcoma. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: In this retrospective analysis, investigational treatment characteristics and longitudinal survival outcomes were analyzed in patients with biopsy-confirmed sarcoma enrolled in early-phase trials at MD Anderson Cancer Center from May 2006 to July 2021. RESULTS: Five hundred eighty-seven patients were included [405 soft tissue, 122 bone, 60 gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST); median of three prior lines of therapy]. Most common subtypes were leiomyosarcoma (17.2%), liposarcoma (14.0%), and GIST (10.2%). Molecular testing was available for 511 patients (87.1%); 221 patients (37.6%) were treated in matched trials. Overall response rate was 13.1% matched compared with 4.9% in unmatched (P < 0.001); the clinical benefit rate at 6 months was 43.9% vs. 19.9% (P < 0.001). Progression-free survival was longer for patients in matched trials (median, 5.5 vs. 2.4 months; P < 0.001), and overall survival was also superior for patients in matched trials (median, 21.5 vs. 12.3 months; P < 0.001). The benefit of enrollment in matched trials was maintained when patients with GIST were excluded from the analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Enrollment in biomarker-matched early-phase trials is associated with improved outcomes in heavily pretreated patients with metastatic sarcoma. Molecular testing of tumors from patients with advanced sarcoma and enrollment in matched trials is a reasonable therapeutic strategy.

Predictors of Oncologic Outcome in Patients Receiving Phase I Investigational Therapy for Recurrent or Metastatic Cervical Cancer.

Introduction: We aimed to identify clinical, pathologic, and treatment factors that are predictive of response and survival in patients with cervical cancer referred to phase I clinical trials. Methods: Patients with cervical cancer who received at least one dose of a phase I investigational agent at our institution between 2014 and 2022 were included. The log-rank test was used to analyze differences in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), and multivariable regression analysis was performed. Results: We included 65 patients with a median age of 41 years (range, 20-74), 3 prior therapies (range, 1-7), and 67.7% squamous carcinoma. The rate of distant metastasis at trial entry was 84.6%. The most common molecular alterations included PIK3CA (46.5%), PD-L1+ (46.2%), EPH (30.0%), and CREBBP (23.1%); 23.1% had received a prior checkpoint inhibitor. Phase I trials were for immunotherapy (58.5%) or targeted therapy (41.5%). The rate of biomarker matching was 21.5%. For all patients, median PFS was 3.6 months (95% CI, 2.0-5.2) and OS was 9.3 months (95% CI, 7.0-10.6). Factors at study entry associated with worse survival were presence of bone metastasis (PFS 1.6 vs 4.4 months: hazard ratio [HR], 2.8; p = 0.001; OS 3.8 vs 10.0 months: HR, 3.9; p < 0.0001) and absolute lymphocyte count below 1000/µL (PFS 1.8 vs 5.2 months: HR, 2.9; p = 0.0004; OS 7.0 vs 10.6 months: HR, 3.2; p = 0.0009). Factors associated only with worse OS were absolute neutrophil count above 4700/µL, hemoglobin below 10.5 g/dL, and smoking status. Grade 3+ treatment-related adverse events were seen in 16.9% of cases. Conclusion: Bone metastasis and absolute lymphocyte count below normal range at phase I study entry portend poor survival in patients with recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer.

Long COVID in cancer patients: preponderance of symptoms in majority of patients over long time period.

Background: An increasing number of observational studies have reported the persistence of symptoms following recovery from acute COVID-19 disease in non-cancer patients. The long-term consequences of COVID-19 are not fully understood particularly in the cancer patient population. The purpose of this study is to assess post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC) in cancer patients following acute COVID-19 recovery. Methods: We identified cancer patients at MD Anderson Cancer Center who were diagnosed with COVID-19 disease between March 1, 2020, and September 1, 2020, and followed them till May 2021. To assess PASC, we collected patients reported outcomes through questionnaires that were sent to patients daily for 14 days after COVID-19 diagnosis then weekly for 3 months, and then monthly thereafter. We also reviewed patients' electronic medical records to capture the persistence or emergence of new COVID19-related symptoms reported during any clinic or hospital encounter beyond 30 days of the acute illness and up to 14 months. Results: We included 312 cancer patients with a median age of 57 years (18-86). The majority of patients had solid tumors (75%). Of the 312 patients, 188 (60%) reported long COVID-19 symptoms with a median duration of 7 months and up to 14 months after COVID-19 diagnosis. The most common symptoms reported included fatigue (82%), sleep disturbances (78%), myalgias (67%), and gastrointestinal symptoms (61%), followed by headache, altered smell or taste, dyspnea (47%), and cough (46%). A higher number of females reported a persistence of symptoms compared to males (63% vs. 37%; p=0.036). Cancer type, neutropenia, lymphocytopenia, and hospital admission during acute COVID-19 disease were comparable in both groups. Among the 188 patients with PASC, only 16 (8.5%) were re-admitted for COVID-related reasons. Conclusions: More than one out of two cancer patients, and more likely females, report PASC that may persist beyond 6 months and even 1 year. The most common symptoms are non-respiratory and consist of fatigue, sleep disturbance, myalgia, and gastrointestinal symptoms. Most of the cancer patients with PASC were managed on outpatient basis with only 8.5% requiring a COVID-19-related re-admission. Funding: This research is supported by the National Institutes of Health/National Cancer Institute under award number P30CA016672, which supports the MD Anderson Cancer Center Clinical Trials Office. The funders had no role in study design, data collection, and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Complex I inhibitor of oxidative phosphorylation in advanced solid tumors and acute myeloid leukemia: phase I trials.

Although targeting oxidative phosphorylation (OXPHOS) is a rational anticancer strategy, clinical benefit with OXPHOS inhibitors has yet to be achieved. Here we advanced IACS-010759, a highly potent and selective small-molecule complex I inhibitor, into two dose-escalation phase I trials in patients with relapsed/refractory acute myeloid leukemia (NCT02882321, n = 17) and advanced solid tumors (NCT03291938, n = 23). The primary endpoints were safety, tolerability, maximum tolerated dose and recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of IACS-010759. The PK, PD, and preliminary antitumor activities of IACS-010759 in patients were also evaluated as secondary endpoints in both clinical trials. IACS-010759 had a narrow therapeutic index with emergent dose-limiting toxicities, including elevated blood lactate and neurotoxicity, which obstructed efforts to maintain target exposure. Consequently no RP2D was established, only modest target inhibition and limited antitumor activity were observed at tolerated doses, and both trials were discontinued. Reverse translational studies in mice demonstrated that IACS-010759 induced behavioral and physiological changes indicative of peripheral neuropathy, which were minimized with the coadministration of a histone deacetylase 6 inhibitor. Additional studies are needed to elucidate the association between OXPHOS inhibition and neurotoxicity, and caution is warranted in the continued development of complex I inhibitors as antitumor agents.

Multicenter Phase II Trial of the WEE1 Inhibitor Adavosertib in Refractory Solid Tumors Harboring CCNE1 Amplification.

PURPOSE: Preclinical cancer models harboring CCNE1 amplification were more sensitive to adavosertib treatment, a WEE1 kinase inhibitor, than models without amplification. Thus, we conducted this phase II study to assess the antitumor activity of adavosertib in patients with CCNE1-amplified, advanced refractory solid tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients aged ≥ 18 years with measurable disease and refractory solid tumors harboring CCNE1 amplification, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, and adequate organ function were studied. Patients received 300 mg of adavosertib once daily on days 1 through 5 and 8 through 12 of a 21-day cycle. The trial followed Bayesian optimal phase II design. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR). RESULTS: Thirty patients were enrolled. The median follow-up duration was 9.9 months. Eight patients had partial responses (PRs), and three had stable disease (SD) ≥ 6 months, with an ORR of 27% (95% CI, 12 to 46), a SD ≥ 6 months/PR rate of 37% (95% CI, 20 to 56), a median progression-free survival duration of 4.1 months (95% CI, 1.8 to 6.4), and a median overall survival duration of 9.9 months (95% CI, 4.8 to 15). Fourteen patients with epithelial ovarian cancer showed an ORR of 36% (95% CI, 13 to 65) and SD ≥ 6 months/PR of 57% (95% CI, 29 to 82), a median progression-free survival duration of 6.3 months (95% CI, 2.4 to 10.2), and a median overall survival duration of 14.9 months (95% CI, 8.9 to 20.9). Common treatment-related toxicities were GI, hematologic toxicities, and fatigue. CONCLUSION: Adavosertib monotherapy demonstrates a manageable toxicity profile and promising clinical activity in refractory solid tumors harboring CCNE1 amplification, especially in epithelial ovarian cancer. Further study of adavosertib, alone or in combination with other therapeutic agents, in CCNE1-amplified epithelial ovarian cancer is warranted.