Salvage chemotherapy regimens with arsenic trioxide for relapsed or refractory neuroblastoma: a promising approach.

In patients with relapsed or refractory neuroblastoma (NB), the limited efficacy of conventional chemotherapies necessitates the exploration of new treatment options. Previous studies have highlighted the anti-tumor properties of arsenic trioxide (ATO) in high-risk NB (HR-NB). This study aims to assess the effectiveness and safety of ATO combined with salvage chemotherapy regimens, featuring cyclophosphamide and topotecan, as a foundational treatment for children with relapsed or refractory NB. Eleven patients (four relapsed, seven refractory NB) were retrospectively analyzed for efficacy and treatment relevance. Salvage treatments, incorporating ATO (0.18 mg/kg daily for 8 h intravenously on days 1 to 10), were administered upon disease progression or relapse, with assessments conducted every two cycles. Treatments had 63.6% efficacy, with six cases of partial response, one case of stable disease, and four cases of disease progression. The overall response rate was 54.5%, and the disease control rate was 63.6%. Importantly, the systemic toxicity experienced by patients following salvage chemotherapy with ATO was mild. Salvage chemotherapy regimens featuring ATO demonstrated potential for prolonging disease stabilization for relapsed or refractory HR-NB patients, exhibiting both favorable efficacy and safety profiles. This suggests further clinical exploration and promotion of this therapeutic approach in the treatment of NB.

Point 1. The inadequate effectiveness of traditional chemotherapy in individuals with recurrent or resistant neuroblastoma (NB) necessitates the investigation of novel therapeutic approaches. Point 2. Arsenic trioxide (ATO)-based salvage treatments are both effective and less toxic in relapsed or refractory NB. Point 3. Salvage chemotherapy regimens incorporating ATO have shown promise in extending disease stabilization in relapsed or refractory high-risk NB patients, with favorable efficacy and safety profiles, which suggests further clinical exploration and promotion of this therapeutic approach in the treatment of NB.

Suvemcitug plus chemotherapy for platinum-resistant epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube and primary peritoneal cancer: A phase 1b dose-escalation trial.

OBJECTIVE: The use of bevacizumab has been hampered by safety concerns despite demonstrable progression-free survival (PFS) benefit in subjects with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer, highlighting the need for novel effective and safe antiangiogenic agents. This study aimed to characterize the tolerability, safety, and antitumor activities of escalating doses of anti-VEGF antibody suvemcitug plus chemotherapy in platinum-resistant ovarian cancer patients. METHODS: This open-label, dose-escalation trial enrolled adult patients (≥18 years) with platinum-resistant histologically or cytologically-confirmed epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube and primary peritoneal cancer. Eligible patients received paclitaxel or topotecan plus escalating doses of suvemcitug 0.5, 1, 1.5, or 2 mg/kg once every two weeks. The primary endpoints were safety and tolerability, and antitumor activities of suvemcitug. RESULTS: Twenty-nine subjects received paclitaxel (n = 11) or topotecan (n = 18). No dose-limiting toxicities occurred. The most common adverse events of special interest were proteinuria (41.4%), hypertension (20.7%) and epistaxis (10.3%). No gastrointestinal perforations occurred. Nine subjects (31.0%, 95% CI 15.3-50.8) demonstrated investigators-confirmed objective response, including complete response in 1 and partial response in 8. The median PFS was 5.4 months (95% CI 2.2-7.4). CONCLUSIONS: Suvemcitug demonstrated an acceptable safety profile and promising antitumor activities in platinum-resistant ovarian cancer patients, supporting its further clinical development.

RESILIENT Part 2: A Randomized, Open-Label Phase III Study of Liposomal Irinotecan Versus Topotecan in Adults With Relapsed Small Cell Lung Cancer.

PURPOSE: The phase III RESILIENT trial compared second-line liposomal irinotecan with topotecan in patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with SCLC and progression on or after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy were randomly assigned (1:1) to intravenous (IV) liposomal irinotecan (70 mg/m2 every 2 weeks in a 6-week cycle) or IV topotecan (1.5 mg/m2 daily for 5 consecutive days, every 3 weeks in a 6-week cycle). The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Key secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR). RESULTS: Among 461 randomly assigned patients, 229 received liposomal irinotecan and 232 received topotecan. The median follow-up was 18.4 months. The median OS was 7.9 months with liposomal irinotecan versus 8.3 months with topotecan (hazard ratio [HR], 1.11 [95% CI, 0.90 to 1.37]; P = .31). The median PFS per blinded independent central review (BICR) was 4.0 months with liposomal irinotecan and 3.3 months with topotecan (HR, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.77 to 1.20]; nominal P = .71); ORR per BICR was 44.1% (95% CI, 37.6 to 50.8) and 21.6% (16.4 to 27.4), respectively. Overall, 42.0% and 83.4% of patients receiving liposomal irinotecan and topotecan, respectively, experienced grade ≥3 related treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). The most common grade ≥3 related TEAEs were diarrhea (13.7%), neutropenia (8.0%), and decreased neutrophil count (4.4%) with liposomal irinotecan and neutropenia (51.6%), anemia (30.9%), and leukopenia (29.1%) with topotecan. CONCLUSION: Liposomal irinotecan and topotecan demonstrated similar median OS and PFS in patients with relapsed SCLC. Although the primary end point of OS was not met, liposomal irinotecan demonstrated a higher ORR than topotecan. The safety profile of liposomal irinotecan was consistent with its known safety profile; no new safety concerns emerged.

Chemo-immunotherapy with dinutuximab beta in patients with relapsed/progressive high-risk neuroblastoma: does chemotherapy backbone matter?

BACKGROUND: Addition of anti-GD2 antibodies to temozolomide-based chemotherapy has demonstrated increased antitumor activity and progression-free survival in patients with relapsed/progressive high-risk neuroblastoma. However, chemo-immunotherapy is not yet approved for this indication. This study presents the chemo-immunotherapy experience in patients with relapsed/progressive high-risk neuroblastoma treated within the off-label use program of the Neuroblastoma Committee of the French Society of Pediatric Oncology (SFCE). METHODS: Dinutuximab beta (dB) was administered alongside temozolomide-topotecan (TOTEM) or temozolomide-irinotecan (TEMIRI) at first disease relapse/progression or topotecan-cyclophosphamide (TopoCyclo) at further relapse/progression. Real-world data on demographics, treatment, antitumor activity and safety was collected from all patients after inclusion in SACHA-France (NCT04477681), a prospective national registry, which documents safety and efficacy data on innovative anticancer therapies prescribed to patients ≤ 25 years old as compassionate or off-label use. RESULTS: Between February 2021 and July 2023, 39 patients with confirmed relapsed/progressive high-risk neuroblastoma (median age 6 years, range 1-24) were treated with dB+TopoCyclo (n = 24) or dB+TOTEM/TEMIRI (n = 15) across 17 centers. In total, 163 chemo-immunotherapy cycles were administered, main toxicities were mild or moderate, with higher incidence of hematological adverse drug reactions with dB+TopoCyclo than dB+TOTEM/TEMIRI. Objective response rate was 42% for dB+TopoCyclo (CI95% 22-63%) and 40% for dB+TOTEM/TEMIRI (CI95% 16-68%). CONCLUSION: Similar objective response rates for dB+TopoCyclo and dB+TOTEM/TEMIRI in patients with relapsed/progressive high-risk neuroblastoma emphasize the importance of chemo-immunotherapy, irrespective of the chemotherapy backbone.

Effect of the combined binding of topotecan and catechin/protocatechuic acid to a pH-sensitive DNA tetrahedron on release and cytotoxicity: Spectroscopic and calorimetric studies.

The therapeutic efficacy of chemotherapy drugs can be effectively improved through the dual effects of their combination with natural polyphenols and the delivery of targeted DNA nanostructures. In this work, the interactions of topotecan (TPT), (+)-catechin (CAT), or protocatechuic acid (PCA) with a pH-sensitive DNA tetrahedron (MUC1-TD) in the binary and ternary systems at pHs 5.0 and 7.4 were investigated by fluorescence spectroscopy and calorimetry. The intercalative binding mode of TPT/CAT/PC to MUC1-TD was confirmed, and their affinity was ranked in the order of PCA > CAT > TPT. The effects of the pH-sensitivity of MUC1-TD and different molecular structures of CAT and PCA on the loading, release, and cytotoxicity of TPT were discussed. The weakened interaction under acidic conditions and the co-loading of CAT/PCA, especially PCA, improved the release of TPT loaded by MUC1-TD. The targeting of MUC1-TD and the synergistic effect with CAT/PCA, especially CAT, enhanced the cytotoxicity of TPT on A549 cells. For L02 cells, the protective effect of CAT/PCA reduced the damage caused by TPT. The single or combined TPT loaded by MUC1-TD was mainly concentrated in the nucleus of A549 cells. This work will provide key information for the combined application of TPT and CAT/PCA loaded by DNA nanostructures to improve chemotherapy efficacy and reduce side effects.

Bevacizumab, Irinotecan, or Topotecan Added to Temozolomide for Children With Relapsed and Refractory Neuroblastoma: Results of the ITCC-SIOPEN BEACON-Neuroblastoma Trial.

PURPOSE: Outcomes for children with relapsed and refractory high-risk neuroblastoma (RR-HRNB) remain dismal. The BEACON Neuroblastoma trial (EudraCT 2012-000072-42) evaluated three backbone chemotherapy regimens and the addition of the antiangiogenic agent bevacizumab (B). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients age 1-21 years with RR-HRNB with adequate organ function and performance status were randomly assigned in a 3 × 2 factorial design to temozolomide (T), irinotecan-temozolomide (IT), or topotecan-temozolomide (TTo) with or without B. The primary end point was best overall response (complete or partial) rate (ORR) during the first six courses, by RECIST or International Neuroblastoma Response Criteria for patients with measurable or evaluable disease, respectively. Safety, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) time were secondary end points. RESULTS: One hundred sixty patients with RR-HRNB were included. For B random assignment (n = 160), the ORR was 26% (95% CI, 17 to 37) with B and 18% (95% CI, 10 to 28) without B (risk ratio [RR], 1.52 [95% CI, 0.83 to 2.77]; P = .17). Adjusted hazard ratio for PFS and OS were 0.89 (95% CI, 0.63 to 1.27) and 1.01 (95% CI, 0.70 to 1.45), respectively. For irinotecan ([I]; n = 121) and topotecan (n = 60) random assignments, RRs for ORR were 0.94 and 1.22, respectively. A potential interaction between I and B was identified. For patients in the bevacizumab-irinotecan-temozolomide (BIT) arm, the ORR was 23% (95% CI, 10 to 42), and the 1-year PFS estimate was 0.67 (95% CI, 0.47 to 0.80). CONCLUSION: The addition of B met protocol-defined success criteria for ORR and appeared to improve PFS. Within this phase II trial, BIT showed signals of antitumor activity with acceptable tolerability. Future trials will confirm these results in the chemoimmunotherapy era.

Berzosertib Plus Topotecan vs Topotecan Alone in Patients With Relapsed Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Patients with relapsed small cell lung cancer (SCLC), a high replication stress tumor, have poor prognoses and few therapeutic options. A phase 2 study showed antitumor activity with the addition of the ataxia telangiectasia and Rad3-related kinase inhibitor berzosertib to topotecan. Objective: To investigate whether the addition of berzosertib to topotecan improves clinical outcomes for patients with relapsed SCLC. Design, Setting, and Participants: Between December 1, 2019, and December 31, 2022, this open-label phase 2 randomized clinical trial recruited 60 patients with SCLC and relapse after 1 or more prior therapies from 16 US cancer centers. Patients previously treated with topotecan were not eligible. Interventions: Eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive topotecan alone (group 1), 1.25 mg/m2 intravenously on days 1 through 5, or with berzosertib (group 2), 210 mg/m2 intravenously on days 2 and 5, in 21-day cycles. Randomization was stratified by tumor sensitivity to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) in the intention-to-treat population. Secondary end points included overall survival (OS) in the overall population and among patients with platinum-sensitive or platinum-resistant tumors. The PFS and OS for each treatment group were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. The log-rank test was used to compare PFS and OS between the 2 groups, and Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate the treatment hazard ratios (HRs) and the corresponding 2-sided 95% CI. Results: Of 60 patients (median [range] age, 59 [34-79] years; 33 [55%] male) included in this study, 20 were randomly assigned to receive topotecan alone and 40 to receive a combination of topotecan with berzosertib. After a median (IQR) follow-up of 21.3 (18.1-28.3) months, there was no difference in PFS between the 2 groups (median, 3.0 [95% CI, 1.2-5.1] months for group 1 vs 3.9 [95% CI, 2.8-4.6] months for group 2; HR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.46-1.41]; P = .44). Overall survival was significantly longer with the combination therapy (5.4 [95% CI, 3.2-6.8] months vs 8.9 [95% CI, 4.8-11.4] months; HR, 0.53 [95% CI, 0.29-0.96], P = .03). Adverse event profiles were similar between the 2 groups (eg, grade 3 or 4 thrombocytopenia, 11 of 20 [55%] vs 20 of 40 [50%], and any grade nausea, 9 of 20 [45%] vs 14 of 40 [35%]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, treatment with berzosertib plus topotecan did not improve PFS compared with topotecan therapy alone among patients with relapsed SCLC. However, the combination treatment significantly improved OS. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03896503.

A Phase Ib Dose-Escalation Study of LCL161 Plus Oral Topotecan for Patients With Relapsed/Refractory Small Cell Lung Cancer and Select Gynecologic Malignancies.

BACKGROUND: This was an open-label, multicenter, single-arm phase Ib dose-escalation study of oral LCL161 administered in combination with oral topotecan in patients with relapsed/refractory small cell lung cancer (SCLC) and select gynecological cancers. METHODS: Cohorts of 3-6 patients initiated treatment with LCL161 and topotecan in escalating doses. LCL161 was administered orally on days 1, 8, and 15 of each 21-day cycle; topotecan was administered orally for the first 5 days of each 21-day cycle. RESULTS: A total of 35 patients were enrolled in 6 cohorts; 30 patients were female; 4 patients had SCLC and 19 patients had ovarian cancer. Median prior lines of therapy were 3 (1-10). Median duration of treatment was 7.1 weeks (0.1-174). The most frequent grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events were thrombocytopenia (51.43%) and anemia (31.43%). ORR was 9.7%; 58% of patients had SD. The study was stopped early before the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase II dose (RP2D) were determined. CONCLUSION: The addition of LCL161 to oral topotecan caused more myelosuppression when dosed together than what was associated with either drug alone. Moreover, the drug combination did not improve outcomes. The study was terminated early (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02649673).

A real-world data analysis of topotecan in the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to monitor and identify adverse events (AEs) associated with topotecan, a medication used for the treatment of solid tumors, in order to improve patient safety and guide medication usage. METHODS: To assess the disproportionality of topotecan-related AEs in real-world data, four algorithms (ROR, PRR, BCPNN, and EBGM) were employed as measures to detect signals of topotecan-associated AEs. RESULTS: A statistical analysis was conducted using data from the FAERS database, encompassing 9,511,161 case reports from 2004Q1 to 2021Q4. Among these reports, 1,896 were identified as primary suspected (PS) AEs related to topotecan, and 155 topotecan-related adverse drug reactions (ADRs) at the preferred terms (PTs) level were selected. The occurrence of topotecan-induced ADRs was analyzed across 23 organ systems. The analysis revealed several expected ADRs, such as anemia, nausea, and vomiting, which were consistent with the drug labels. Additionally, unexpected significant ADRs associated with eye disorders at the system organ class (SOC) level were identified, indicating potential adverse effects not currently mentioned in the drug instructions. CONCLUSION: This study identified new and unexpected signals of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) related to topotecan, providing valuable insights into the relationship between ADRs and topotecan usage. The findings highlight the importance of ongoing monitoring and surveillance to detect and manage AEs effectively, ultimately improving patient safety during topotecan treatment.

A phase II trial of nifurtimox combined with topotecan and cyclophosphamide for refractory or relapsed neuroblastoma and medulloblastoma.

Children with relapsed/refractory (R/R) neuroblastoma (NB) and medulloblastoma (MB) have poor outcomes. We evaluated the efficacy of nifurtimox (Nfx) in a clinical trial for children with R/R NB and MB. Subjects were divided into three strata: first relapse NB, multiply R/R NB, and R/R MB. All patients received Nfx (30 mg/kg/day divided TID daily), Topotecan (0.75 mg/m2 /dose, days 1-5) and Cyclophosphamide (250 mg/m2 /dose, days 1-5) every 3 weeks. Response was assessed after every two courses using International Neuroblastoma Response Criteria and Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria. One hundred and twelve eligible patients were enrolled with 110 evaluable for safety and 76 evaluable for response. In stratum 1, there was a 53.9% response rate (CR + PR), and a 69.3% total benefit rate (CR + PR + SD), with an average time on therapy of 165.2 days. In stratum 2, there was a 16.3% response rate, and a 72.1% total benefit rate, and an average time on study of 158.4 days. In stratum 3, there was a 20% response rate and a 65% total benefit rate, an average time on therapy of 105.0 days. The most common side effects included bone marrow suppression and reversible neurologic complications. The combination of Nfx, topotecan and cyclophosphamide was tolerated, and the objective response rate plus SD of 69.8% in these heavily pretreated populations suggests that this combination is an effective option for patients with R/R NB and MB. Although few objective responses were observed, the high percentage of stabilization of disease and prolonged response rate in patients with multiply relapsed disease shows this combination therapy warrants further testing.

Chronic convection-enhanced delivery of topotecan for patients with recurrent glioblastoma: a first-in-patient, single-centre, single-arm, phase 1b trial.

BACKGROUND: Topotecan is cytotoxic to glioma cells but is clinically ineffective because of drug delivery limitations. Systemic delivery is limited by toxicity and insufficient brain penetrance, and, to date, convection-enhanced delivery (CED) has been restricted to a single treatment of restricted duration. To address this problem, we engineered a subcutaneously implanted catheter-pump system capable of repeated, chronic (prolonged, pulsatile) CED of topotecan into the brain and tested its safety and biological effects in patients with recurrent glioblastoma. METHODS: We did a single-centre, open-label, single-arm, phase 1b clinical trial at Columbia University Irving Medical Center (New York, NY, USA). Eligible patients were at least 18 years of age with solitary, histologically confirmed recurrent glioblastoma showing radiographic progression after surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy, and a Karnofsky Performance Status of at least 70. Five patients had catheters stereotactically implanted into the glioma-infiltrated peritumoural brain and connected to subcutaneously implanted pumps that infused 146 µM topotecan 200 µL/h for 48 h, followed by a 5-7-day washout period before the next infusion, with four total infusions. After the fourth infusion, the pump was removed and the tumour was resected. The primary endpoint of the study was safety of the treatment regimen as defined by presence of serious adverse events. Analyses were done in all treated patients. The trial is closed, and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03154996. FINDINGS: Between Jan 22, 2018, and July 8, 2019, chronic CED of topotecan was successfully completed safely in all five patients, and was well tolerated without substantial complications. The only grade 3 adverse event related to treatment was intraoperative supplemental motor area syndrome (one [20%] of five patients in the treatment group), and there were no grade 4 adverse events. Other serious adverse events were related to surgical resection and not the study treatment. Median follow-up was 12 months (IQR 10-17) from pump explant. Post-treatment tissue analysis showed that topotecan significantly reduced proliferating tumour cells in all five patients. INTERPRETATION: In this small patient cohort, we showed that chronic CED of topotecan is a potentially safe and active therapy for recurrent glioblastoma. Our analysis provided a unique tissue-based assessment of treatment response without the need for large patient numbers. This novel delivery of topotecan overcomes limitations in delivery and treatment response assessment for patients with glioblastoma and could be applicable for other anti-glioma drugs or other CNS diseases. Further studies are warranted to determine the effect of this drug delivery approach on clinical outcomes. FUNDING: US National Institutes of Health, The William Rhodes and Louise Tilzer Rhodes Center for Glioblastoma, the Michael Weiner Glioblastoma Research Into Treatment Fund, the Gary and Yael Fegel Foundation, and The Khatib Foundation.

Biomarker-guided targeted therapy in platinum-resistant ovarian cancer (AMBITION; KGOG 3045): a multicentre, open-label, five-arm, uncontrolled, umbrella trial.

OBJECTIVE: Management of heavily pre-treated platinum-resistant ovarian cancer remains a therapeutic challenge. Outcomes are poor with non-platinum, single-agent chemotherapy (CT); however, molecularly targeted anticancer therapies provide new options. METHODS: This open-label, investigator-initiated, phase 2 umbrella trial (NCT03699449) enrolled patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer (at least 2 prior lines of CT and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group 0/1) to receive combination therapy based on homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) and programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) status determined by archival tumour sample assessment. HRD-positive patients were randomised to either olaparib 200mg bid tablet + cediranib 30mg qd (arm 1) or olaparib 300mg bid tablet + durvalumab 1,500mg q4w (arm 2). HRD-negative patients were allocated to either durvalumab 1,500 mg q4w + pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) or topotecan or weekly paclitaxel (6 cycles; arm 3, those with PD-L1 expression) or durvalumab 1,500 mg q4w + tremelimumab 75mg q4w (4 doses) + PLD or topotecan or weekly paclitaxel (4 cycles; arm 4, those without PD-L1 expression). Arm 5 (durvalumab 1,500 mg q4w + tremelimumab 300mg [1 dose] + weekly paclitaxel [60 mg/m² D1,8,15 q4w for 4 cycles] was initiated after arm 4 completed. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR; Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours 1.1). RESULTS: Between Dec 2018 and Oct 2020, 70 patients (median 57 years; median 3 prior treatment lines [range 2-10]) were treated (n=16, 14, 5, 18, and 17, respectively). Overall ORR was 37.1% (26/70, 95% confidence interval=25.9, 49.5); 2 achieved complete response. ORR was 50%, 42.9%, 20%, 33.3%, and 29.4%, respectively. Grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were reported in 37.5%, 35.7%, 20%, 66.7%, and 35.3% of patients, respectively. No TRAEs leading to treatment discontinuation and no grade 5 TRAEs were observed. CONCLUSION: This study, the first biomarker-driven umbrella trial in platinum-resistant recurrent ovarian cancer, suggests clinical utility with biomarker-driven targeted therapy. All treatment combinations were manageable, and without unexpected toxicities. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03699449.

Clofarabine with topotecan, vinorelbine, and thiotepa reinduction regimen for children and young adults with relapsed AML.

Effective reinduction regimens are needed for children with relapsed and refractory acute myeloid leukemia (AML), as outcomes remain poor. Therapeutic options are limited in this heavily pretreated patient population, many of whom have reached lifetime recommended doses of anthracycline chemotherapy. The development of effective non-anthracycline-based salvage regimens is crucial to these patients who are at significant risk of life-threatening cardiotoxicity. We previously reported results of a phase 2 trial of a clofarabine-based regimen with topotecan, vinorelbine, and thiotepa (TVTC) in patients with relapsed acute leukemias. Here we report on an expanded bicenter cohort of 33 patients, <25 years of age, with relapsed/refractory AML treated with up to 2 cycles of the TVTC reinduction regimen from 2007 to 2018. The overall response rate, defined as complete remission or complete remission with partial recovery of platelet count, was 71.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 41.9-91.6) for those patients in first relapse (n = 14) and 47.4% (95% CI, 24.4-71.1) for patients in second or greater relapse or with refractory disease. Responses were seen across multiple high-risk cytogenetic and molecular subtypes, with 84% of responders successfully bridged to allogeneic stem cell transplantation. The 5-year overall survival for patients in first relapse was 46.2% (95% CI, 19.1-73.3) and 50.0% (95% CI, 26.9-73.1) for patients who responded to TVTC. For pediatric and young adult patients with relapsed/refractory AML, TVTC reinduction compares favorably with currently used salvage regimens and warrants further exploration.

Management of cataracts secondary to intravitreal chemotherapy injections for retinoblastoma seeding.

PURPOSE: To report our experience in the management of cataracts presumably due to intravitreal chemotherapy administration in eyes with vitreous disease associated with retinoblastoma. METHODS: This retrospective study consisted of a cohort of five eyes of five retinoblastoma patients who developed cataracts secondary to intravitreal chemotherapy administration and who then underwent cataract surgery. All patients underwent lensectomy and anterior vitrectomy with/without intraocular lens implantation via clear corneal approach. All cases were administered intraoperative intravitreal melphalan (35-40 mcg) and topotecan (10-20 mcg) at the end of cataract surgery as a preventive measure against retinoblastoma spread. Injections were repeated as needed in monthly follow-ups. Main outcome measures were enucleation rate and disease-free survival time. RESULTS: The age at surgery ranged between 5 and 10 years. Follow-up time varied from 12 to 16 months. Treatment-free period before surgery ranged between 3 and 20 months. Time from last injection to cataract detection was: 2, 2, 10, 6, and 7 months; and time from last injection to cataract surgery was: 8, 3, 20, 7, and 15 months in cases 1-5, respectively. None of the eyes required enucleation. Tumor control was achieved in all patients at the end of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Injection of melphalan and topotecan into anterior parts of the vitreous may lead to cataract formation. This can be safely managed with lensectomy and anterior vitrectomy and the use of intravitreal administration of melphalan and topotecan at the conclusion of the surgery as a precautionary measure against the potential risk of extraocular spread.

First-in-child phase I/II study of the dual mTORC1/2 inhibitor vistusertib (AZD2014) as monotherapy and in combination with topotecan-temozolomide in children with advanced malignancies: arms E and F of the AcSé-ESMART trial.

AIM: Arms E and F of the AcSé-ESMART phase I/II platform trial aimed to define the recommended dose and preliminary activity of the dual mTORC1/2 inhibitor vistusertib as monotherapy and with topotecan-temozolomide in a molecularly enriched population of paediatric patients with relapsed/refractory malignancies. In addition, we evaluated genetic phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K)/AKT/ mammalian (or mechanistic) target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathway alterations across the Molecular Profiling for Paediatric and Young Adult Cancer Treatment Stratification (MAPPYACTS) trial (NCT02613962). EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN AND RESULTS: Four patients were treated in arm E and 10 in arm F with a median age of 14.3 years. Main diagnoses were glioma and sarcoma. Dose escalation was performed as per the continuous reassessment method, expansion in an Ensign design. The vistusertib single agent administered at 75 mg/m2 twice a day (BID) on 2 days/week and vistusertib 30 mg/m2 BID on 3 days/week combined with temozolomide 100 mg/m2/day and topotecan 0.50 mg/m2/day on the first 5 days of each 4-week cycle were safe. Treatment was well tolerated with the main toxicity being haematological. Pharmacokinetics indicates equivalent exposure in children compared with adults. Neither tumour response nor prolonged stabilisation was observed, including in the 12 patients whose tumours exhibited PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway alterations. Advanced profiling across relapsed/refractory paediatric cancers of the MAPPYACTS cohort shows genetic alterations associated with this pathway in 28.0% of patients, with 10.5% carrying mutations in the core pathway genes. CONCLUSIONS: Vistusertib was well tolerated in paediatric patients. Study arms were terminated because of the absence of tumour responses and insufficient target engagement of vistusertib observed in adult trials. Targeting the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway remains a therapeutic avenue to be explored in paediatric patients. CLINICAL TRIAL IDENTIFIER: NCT2813135.

Lurbinectedin versus pegylated liposomal doxorubicin or topotecan in patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer: A multicenter, randomized, controlled, open-label phase 3 study (CORAIL).

OBJECTIVE: The randomized phase 3 CORAIL trial evaluated whether lurbinectedin improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared to pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) or topotecan in patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to lurbinectedin 3.2 mg/m2 1-h i.v. infusion q3wk (experimental arm), versus PLD 50 mg/m2 1-h i.v. infusion q4wk or topotecan 1.50 mg/m2 30-min i.v. infusion Days 1-5 q3wk (control arm). Stratification factors were PS (0 vs. ≥1), prior PFI (1-3 months vs. >3 months), and prior chemotherapy lines (1-2 vs. 3). The primary endpoint was PFS by Independent Review Committee in all randomized patients. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02421588. RESULTS: 442 patients were randomized: 221 in lurbinectedin arm and 221 in control arm (127 PLD and 94 topotecan). With a median follow-up of 25.6 months, median PFS was 3.5 months (95% CI, 2.1-3.7) in the lurbinectedin arm and 3.6 months (95% CI, 2.7-3.8) in the control arm (stratified log-rank p = 0.6294; HR = 1.057). Grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were most frequent in the control arm: 64.8% vs. 47.9% (p = 0.0005), mainly due to hematological toxicities. The most common grade ≥ 3 AEs were: fatigue (7.3% of patients) and nausea (5.9%) with lurbinectedin; mucosal inflammation (8.5%) and fatigue (8.0%) in the control arm. CONCLUSIONS: The primary endpoint of improvement in PFS was not met. Lurbinectedin showed similar antitumor efficacy and was better tolerated than current standard of care in patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer.

Phase I or II Study of Ribociclib in Combination With Topotecan-Temozolomide or Everolimus in Children With Advanced Malignancies: Arms A and B of the AcSé-ESMART Trial.

PURPOSE: AcSé-ESMART is a proof-of-concept, phase I or II, platform trial, designed to explore targeted agents in a molecularly enriched cancer population. Arms A and B aimed to define the recommended phase II dose and activity of the CDK4/6 inhibitor ribociclib with topotecan and temozolomide (TOTEM) or everolimus, respectively, in children with recurrent or refractory malignancies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Ribociclib was administered orally once daily for 16 days after TOTEM for 5 days (arm A) or for 21 days with everolimus orally once daily continuously in a 28-day cycle (arm B). Dose escalation followed the continuous reassessment method, and activity assessment the Ensign design. Arms were enriched on the basis of molecular alterations in the cell cycle or PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathways. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients were included, 14 in arm A and 18 in arm B, and 31 were treated. Fourteen patients had sarcomas (43.8%), and 13 brain tumors (40.6%). Main toxicities were leukopenia, neutropenia, and lymphopenia. The recommended phase II dose was ribociclib 260 mg/m2 once a day, temozolomide 100 mg/m2 once a day, and topotecan 0.5 mg/m2 once a day (arm A) and ribociclib 175 mg/m2 once a day and everolimus 2.5 mg/m2 once a day (arm B). Pharmacokinetic analyses confirmed the drug-drug interaction of ribociclib on everolimus exposure. Two patients (14.3%) had stable disease as best response in arm A, and seven (41.2%) in arm B, including one patient with T-acute lymphoblastic leukemia with significant blast count reduction. Alterations considered for enrichment were present in 25 patients (81%) and in eight of nine patients with stable disease; the leukemia exhibited CDKN2A/B and PTEN deficiency. CONCLUSION: Ribociclib in combination with TOTEM or everolimus was well-tolerated. The observed activity signals initiated a follow-up study of the ribociclib-everolimus combination in a population enriched with molecular alterations within both pathways.

Phase II study of pazopanib with oral topotecan in patients with metastatic and non-resectable soft tissue and bone sarcomas.

BACKGROUND: Pazopanib is active in refractory soft-tissue sarcoma (STS) and significantly prolongs PFS. Prior studies of combinations of metronomic topotecan with pazopanib have indicated preclinical evidence of response in patients with sarcoma. METHODS: This prospective, single arm, phase II study evaluated the efficacy of the combination of pazopanib with topotecan in patients with metastatic or unresectable non-adipocytic STS. Furthermore, it incorporated exploratory arms for osteosarcoma and liposarcoma. The primary endpoint was progression-free rate at 12 weeks in the non-adipocytic STS cohort. RESULTS: 57.5% of patients in the non-adipocytic STS cohort were progression free at 12 weeks, which did not meet the primary endpoint of the study (66%). The exploratory osteosarcoma cohort exceeded previously established phase II trial comparator data benchmark of 12% with a PFR at 12 weeks of 69.55%. Treatment with the combination of pazopanib and topotecan was accompanied by a grade 3 or 4 toxicities in most patients. CONCLUSIONS: In this prospective trial in refractory metastatic or unresectable STS and osteosarcoma, the combination of pazopanib with topotecan did not meet its primary endpoint of progression-free rate at 12 weeks. The combination of pazopanib with topotecan was associated with a high degree of toxicity.

A randomised phase 2b study comparing the efficacy and safety of belotecan vs. topotecan as monotherapy for sensitive-relapsed small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: This study compared the efficacy/safety of the camptothecin analogues belotecan and topotecan for sensitive-relapsed small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). METHODS: One-hundred-and-sixty-four patients were randomised (1:1) to receive five consecutive daily intravenous infusions of topotecan (1.5 mg/m2) or belotecan (0.5 mg/m2), every 3 weeks, for six cycles. Main outcomes were objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), tolerability and toxicity. The study statistical plan was non-inferiority design with ORR as the endpoint. RESULTS: In the belotecan vs. topotecan groups, ORR (primary endpoint) was 33% vs. 21% (p = 0.09) and DCR was 85% vs. 70% (p = 0.030). PFS was not different between groups. Median OS was significantly longer with belotecan than with topotecan (13.2 vs. 8.2 months, HR = 0.69, 95% CI: 0.48-0.99), particularly in patients aged <65 years, with more advanced disease (i.e., extensive-stage disease, time to relapse: 3-6 months), or Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 1 or 2. More belotecan recipients completed all treatment cycles (53% vs. 35%; p = 0.022). CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy/safety of belotecan warrants further evaluation in Phase 3 trials. Belotecan potentially offers an alternative to topotecan for sensitive-relapsed SCLC, particularly in patients aged <65 years, with more advanced disease, or poor performance.

Phase Ib/II study of weekly topotecan and daily gefitinib in patients with platinum resistant ovarian, peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancer.

INTRODUCTION: 50-70% of epithelial ovarian cancers overexpress epidermal growth factor receptor, and its expression has been correlated with poor prognosis. We conducted a phase Ib/II trial to examine the efficacy, safety, and toxicity of gefitinib, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor, combined with topotecan in women with recurrent ovarian cancer with epidermal growth factor receptor positivity. METHODS: Patients with measurable recurrent or persistent cancer after treatment with a platinum containing regimen with positive epidermal growth factor receptor expression, as determined by immunohistochemistry, were eligible for the study. Initial treatment was 250 mg/day gefitinib (oral) and 2.0 mg/m2 topotecan (intravenous) on days 1, 8, and 15, on a 28 day cycle. Dose escalations were planned for topotecan (dose levels 1-3: 2, 3, and 4 mg/m2) until the maximum tolerated dose was reached. RESULTS: 19 patients received a total of 61 cycles. Median age was 59.8 years (range 42-76 years). Histologic types in treated patients included 74% serous (n=14), 11% mixed (n=2), 11% transitional (n=2), and 5% clear cell (n=1). For phase Ib, three patients were treated at dose level 1, three at dose level 2, and three at dose level 3 for topotecan. The maximum tolerated dose was 4.0 mg/m2 (days 1, 8, and 15) for topotecan and 250 mg (daily) for gefitinib. Therefore, dose level 3 was used for phase II. Among the 19 patients, 63.2% (n=12) had progressive disease, 15.8% (n=3) had stable disease, 10.5% (n=2) had a partial response, and 10.5% (n=2) were not evaluable. The most serious adverse events of any grade attributed to the therapy were anemia (89.4%), neutropenia (68.4%), abdominal pain (84%), constipation (78.9%), and diarrhea (78.9%). CONCLUSION: Although the drug combination was relatively well tolerated, this prospective phase Ib/II clinical trial did not show sufficient clinical activity of topotecan combined with gefitinib in patients with epidermal growth factor receptor positive recurrent ovarian, fallopian tube, or peritoneal cancers.