Outcome and molecular landscape of patients with PIK3CA-mutated metastatic breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: α-Selective phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K) inhibitors improve outcome in patients with PIK3CA-mutated, hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/Her2- metastatic breast cancer (mBC). Nevertheless, it is still unclear how to integrate this new drug family in the treatment landscape. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 649 patients with mBC from the SAFIR02 trial (NCT02299999), with available mutational profiles were selected for outcome analysis. PIK3CA mutations were prospectively determined by next-generation sequencing on metastatic samples. The mutational landscape of PIK3CA-mutated mBC was assessed by whole-exome sequencing (n = 617). Finally, the prognostic value of PIK3CA mutations during chemotherapy was assessed in plasma samples (n = 44) by next-generation sequencing and digital PCR. RESULTS: Some 28% (104/364) of HR+/Her2- tumors and 10% (27/255) of triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) presented a PIK3CA mutation (P < 0.001). PIK3CA-mutated HR+/Her2- mBC was less sensitive to chemotherapy [adjusted odds ratio: 0.40; 95% confidence interval (0.22-0.71); P = 0.002], and presented a worse overall survival (OS) compared with PIK3CA wild-type [adjusted hazard ratio: 1.44; 95% confidence interval (1.02-2.03); P = 0.04]. PIK3CA-mutated HR+/Her2- mBC was enriched in MAP3K1 mutations (15% versus 5%, P = 0.0005). In metastatic TNBC (mTNBC), the median OS in patients with PIK3CA mutation was 24 versus 14 months for PIK3CA wild-type (P = 0.03). We further looked at the distribution of PIK3CA mutation in mTNBC according to HR expression on the primary tumor. Some 6% (9/138) of patients without HR expression on the primary and 36% (14/39) of patients with HR+ on the primary presented PIK3CA mutation (P < 0.001). The level of residual PIK3CA mutations in plasma after one to three cycles of chemotherapy was associated with a poor OS [continuous variable, hazard ratio: 1.03, 95% confidence interval (1.01-1.05), P = 0.007]. CONCLUSION: PIK3CA-mutated HR+/Her2- mBC patients present a poor outcome and resistance to chemotherapy. Patients with PIK3CA-mutated TNBC present a better OS. This could be explained by an enrichment of PIK3CA mutations in luminal BC which lost HR expression in the metastatic setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: SAFIR02 trial: NCT02299999.

Safety and clinical activity of the Notch inhibitor, crenigacestat (LY3039478), in an open-label phase I trial expansion cohort of advanced or metastatic adenoid cystic carcinoma.

Background Deregulated Notch signaling is implicated in multiple cancers. The phase I trial (I6F-MC-JJCA) investigated the safety and anti-tumor activity of crenigacestat (LY3039478), a selective oral Notch inhibitor, in an expansion cohort of patients with adenoid cystic carcinoma (ACC) who received the dose-escalation-recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D), established previously (Massard C, et al., Annals Oncol 2018, 29:1911-17). Methods Patients with advanced or metastatic cancer, measurable disease, ECOG-PS ≤1, and baseline tumor tissue were enrolled. Primary objectives were to identify a safe RP2D, confirm this dose in expansion cohorts, and document anti-tumor activity. Secondary objectives included safety and progression-free survival (PFS). The ACC expansion cohort received the RP2D regimen of 50 mg crenigacestat thrice per week in a 28-day cycle until disease progression or other discontinuation criteria were met. Results Twenty-two patients with ACC were enrolled in the expansion cohort (median age of 60 years). Median treatment duration was 3 cycles with 6 patients remaining on treatment. There were no objective responses; 1 (5%) patient had an unconfirmed partial response. Disease control rate was 73% and 4 patients had stable disease ≥6 months. Median PFS was 5.3 months (95%CI: 2.4-NE)) for the 22 patients; and 7.7 months (95%CI: 4.0-NR) and 2.4 months (95%CI: 1.1-NE) in the subgroup of patients in second-line (n = 7) or ≥ third-line (n = 9), respectively. Frequent treatment-related-adverse events (all grades) included diarrhea, fatigue, vomiting, decreased appetite, dry mouth, and dry skin. There were no new safety signals. Conclusion The crenigacestat RP2D regimen induced manageable toxicity and limited clinical activity, without confirmed responses, in heavily pretreated patients with ACC.

Novel patterns of response under immunotherapy.

Novel patterns of response and progression to immunotherapy have been reported that are not observed with conventional cytotoxic or targeted anticancer treatments. A major breakthrough with immunotherapy is its potential to achieve durable responses in a subset of patients with advanced cancer that can be maintained several years even after stopping the treatment. No standardized definition of durable response exists in the literature, and the optimal duration of treatment in case of durable response is not clearly established. However, the majority of patients do not respond to immunotherapy. Initially reported in advanced melanoma patients, pseudoprogression occurs when tumor index lesions regress after initial progression, supporting the concept of treating some patients beyond progression. Overall, reported rates of pseudoprogression never exceeded 10%, meaning that the large majority of patients who have a disease progression will not eventually respond to treatment. The decision to pursue treatment beyond progression must therefore only be taken in carefully selected patients with clinical benefit, who did not experience severe toxicities with immunotherapy. Conversely, rapid progressions, called hyperprogressions, were reported by several teams with rates ranging from 4% to 29%. These observations need to be confirmed from randomized trials. It is essential to interrupt the treatment in patients with hyperprogression, in order to switch to another potentially active treatment. Finally, some patients experience dissociated responses, with some lesions shrinking and others growing. Local treatment with surgery or radiotherapy for growing lesions may be considered. Several immune-specific-related response criteria were developed to better capture benefits of immunotherapy. These criteria only address the pseudoprogression pattern of response, and do not capture the other patterns of response such as hyperprogression and dissociated response. The classic RECIST remains a reasonable and meaningful method to assess response to immunotherapy in the clinic.

Phase I study of emactuzumab single agent or in combination with paclitaxel in patients with advanced/metastatic solid tumors reveals depletion of immunosuppressive M2-like macrophages.

BACKGROUND: Emactuzumab is a monoclonal antibody against the colony-stimulating factor-1 receptor and targets tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs). This study assessed the safety, clinical activity, pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) of emactuzumab, as monotherapy and in combination with paclitaxel, in patients with advanced solid tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This open-label, phase Ia/b study comprised two parts (dose escalation and dose expansion), each containing two arms (emactuzumab, every 2 or 3 weeks, as monotherapy or in combination with paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 weekly). The dose-escalation part explored the maximum tolerated dose and optimal biological dose (OBD). The dose-expansion part extended the safety assessment and investigated the objective response rate. A PK/PD analysis of serial blood, skin and tumor biopsies was used to explore proof of mechanism and confirm the OBD. RESULTS: No maximum tolerated dose was reached in either study arm, and the safety profile of emactuzumab alone and in combination does not appear to preclude its use. No patients receiving emactuzumab monotherapy showed an objective response; the objective response rate for emactuzumab in combination with paclitaxel was 7% across all doses. Skin macrophages rather than peripheral blood monocytes or circulating colony-stimulating factor-1 were identified as an optimal surrogate PD marker to select the OBD. Emactuzumab treatment alone and in combination with paclitaxel resulted in a plateau of immunosuppressive TAM reduction at the OBD of 1000 mg administered every 2 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Emactuzumab showed specific reduction of immunosuppressive TAMs at the OBD in both treatment arms but did not result in clinically relevant antitumor activity alone or in combination with paclitaxel. (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01494688).

Personalized biomarker-based treatment strategy for patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: EORTC position and approach.

The molecular landscape of squamous cell carcinoma of the head and the neck (SCCHN) has been characterized and actionable or targetable genomic alterations have been identified. However, targeted therapies have very limited activity in unselected SCCHN, and the current treatment strategy is still based on tumor location and disease stage and not on tumor biology. Trying to select upfront the patients who will benefit from a specific treatment might be a way to improve patients' outcome. With the objective of optimizing the activity of targeted therapies and immunotherapy, we have designed an umbrella biomarker-driven study dedicated to recurrent and/or metastatic SCCHN patients (EORTC-1559-HNCG, NCT03088059). In this article, we review not only the different trial designs for biomarker-driven studies with their respective advantages and opportunities but also the potential pitfalls that led to the design of the EORTC-1559-HNCG protocol. We also discuss the scientific and logistic challenges of biomarker-driven trials.

First-in-human study of LY3039478, an oral Notch signaling inhibitor in advanced or metastatic cancer.

Background: Deregulated Notch signaling due to mutation or overexpression of ligands and/or receptors is implicated in various human malignancies. γ-Secretase inhibitors inhibit Notch signaling by preventing cleavage of transmembrane domain of Notch protein. LY3039478 is a novel, potent Notch inhibitor decreases Notch signaling and its downstream biologic effects. In this first-in-human study, we report the safety, pharmacokinetic (PK) profile, pharmacodynamic effects, and antitumor activity of LY3039478 in patients with advanced or metastatic cancer. Methods: This phase I, open-label, multicenter, nonrandomized, and dose-escalation phase study determined and confirmed the recommended phase II dose of LY3039478 (oral dose: 2.5-100 mg, thrice weekly (TIW) on a 28-day cycle). The primary objectives are to determine (part A) and confirm (part B) a recommended phase II dose that may be safely administered to patients with advanced or metastatic cancer, and secondary objectives include evaluation of safety, tolerability, PK parameters, and preliminary antitumor activity of LY3039478. Results: A total of 110 patients were treated with LY3039478 monotherapy between 31 October 2012 and 15 July 2016. Dose-limiting toxicities were thrombocytopenia, colitis, and nausea. Most adverse events were gastrointestinal. The recommended phase II dose was 50 mg TIW, because of its better tolerability compared with 75 mg. The PKs of LY3039478 appeared dose proportional. Pharmacodynamic data indicate an ∼80% inhibition of plasma Aß, and >50% inhibition of Notch-regulated genes hairy and enhancer of split-1, cyclin D1, and Notch-regulated ankyrin repeat at 45-100-mg dose. Clinical activity (tumor necrosis, metabolic response, or tumor shrinkage) was observed in patients with breast cancer, leiomyosarcoma, and adenoid cystic carcinoma. Conclusion: Potent inhibition of Notch signaling by LY3039478 was well tolerated at doses associated with target engagement, and demonstrated evidence of clinical activity in heavily pretreated patients. Further investigation with LY3039478 as monotherapy and in combination with targeted agent or chemotherapy is ongoing. Clinicaltrials.gov ID: NCT01695005.

The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Precision Medicine Glossary.

Background: Precision medicine is rapidly evolving within the field of oncology and has brought many new concepts and terminologies that are often poorly defined when first introduced, which may subsequently lead to miscommunication within the oncology community. The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) recognises these challenges and is committed to support the adoption of precision medicine in oncology. To add clarity to the language used by oncologists and basic scientists within the context of precision medicine, the ESMO Translational Research and Personalised Medicine Working Group has developed a standardised glossary of relevant terms. Materials and methods: Relevant terms for inclusion in the glossary were identified via an ESMO member survey conducted in Autumn 2016, and by the ESMO Translational Research and Personalised Medicine Working Group members. Each term was defined by experts in the field, discussed and, if necessary, modified by the Working Group before reaching consensus approval. A literature search was carried out to determine which of the terms, 'precision medicine' and 'personalised medicine', is most appropriate to describe this field. Results: A total of 43 terms are included in the glossary, grouped into five main themes-(i) mechanisms of decision, (ii) characteristics of molecular alterations, (iii) tumour characteristics, (iv) clinical trials and statistics and (v) new research tools. The glossary classes 'precision medicine' or 'personalised medicine' as technically interchangeable but the term 'precision medicine' is favoured as it more accurately reflects the highly precise nature of new technologies that permit base pair resolution dissection of cancer genomes and is less likely to be misinterpreted. Conclusions: The ESMO Precision Medicine Glossary provides a resource to facilitate consistent communication in this field by clarifying and raising awareness of the language employed in cancer research and oncology practice. The glossary will be a dynamic entity, undergoing expansion and refinement over the coming years.

Hyperprogression during anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy in patients with recurrent and/or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Pembrolizumab and nivolumab are immune checkpoint inhibitors targeting PD-1 that have recently been approved in pretreated recurrent and/or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (R/M HNSCC) patients. In the clinic, some patients seem not only not to benefit from anti-PD-L1/PD-1 agents but rather to experience an acceleration of tumor growth kinetics (TGK). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively compared TGK on immunotherapy and TGK on last treatment in patients with R/M HNSCC treated with PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in four French centers. The TGK ratio (TGKR, ratio of the slope of tumor growth before treatment and the slope of tumor growth on treatment) was calculated. Hyperprogression was defined as a TGKR ≥ 2. RESULTS: From September 2012 to September 2015, 34 patients were identified. Patterns of recurrence included exclusive loco-regional recurrence in 14 patients, exclusive distant metastases in 11 patients, and both in 9 patients. No pseudo-progression was observed. Hyperprogression was observed in 10 patients (29%), including 9 patients with at least a locoregional recurrence, and only 1 patient with exclusively distant metastases. Hyperprogression significantly correlated with a regional recurrence (TGKR ≥ 2: 90% versus TGKR < 2: 37%, P = 0.008), but not with local or distant recurrence. Hyperprogression was associated with a shorter progression-free survival (PFS) according to RECIST (P = 0.003) and irRECIST (P = 0.02), but not with overall survival (P = 0.77). CONCLUSIONS: Hyperprogression was observed in 29% of patients with R/M HNSCC treated with anti-PD-L1/PD-1 agents and correlated with a shorter PFS. It occurred in 39% of patients with at least a locoregional recurrence and 9% of patients with exclusively distant metastases. No pseudo-progressions were reported. Mechanisms and causality of hyperprogression should further be assessed through prospective controlled studies.

Randomized phase II trial comparing molecularly targeted therapy based on tumor molecular profiling versus conventional therapy in patients with refractory cancer: cross-over analysis from the SHIVA trial.

Background: Several studies used the ratio of progression-free survival (PFS) on genotype-matched treatment to PFS on genotype-unmatched treatment to assess the efficacy of therapy guided by patients' tumor molecular profiling. We evaluated the PFS ratio from patients who cross-over in the SHIVA trial. Patients and methods: The primary end point of the SHIVA trial was to compare PFS on molecularly targeted agents (MTAs) based on tumor molecular profiling and treatment at physician's choice (TPC) in patients with any kind of cancer who had failed standard-of-care therapy. The experimental treatment included only marketed MTAs given outside their indications according to a pre-specified treatment algorithm. Patients were allowed to cross-over at disease progression in both arms. Response was evaluated according to RECIST 1.1 at randomization and at cross-over. We evaluated the ratio of PFS on MTA (PFSMTA) to PFS on TPC (PFSTPC) in patients who crossed-over. Results: Among 741 patients enrolled in the SHIVA trial, 197 were randomized, and 95 crossed-over, including 70 patients from the TPC to the MTA arm and 25 patients from the MTA to the TPC arm. Two patients crossed-over in the TPC arm without disease progression. The PFSMTA/PFSTPC ratio exceeded 1.3 in 37% of patients who crossed-over from the TPC to the MTA arm. The PFSMTA/PFSTPC ratio exceeded 1.3 in 61% of patients who crossed-over from the MTA arm to the TPC arm. Conclusions: The cross-over analysis of the SHIVA trial identified 37% of patients who crossed-over from TPC to MTA with a PFSMTA/PFSTPC ratio exceeding 1.3.

Patients' perceived tolerance of side effects in phase I cancer clinical trials: A qualitative study.

This qualitative study aimed to explore cancer patients' perceived tolerance of side effects in phase I drug trials. Patients with solid tumours receiving molecularly targeted agents with/without chemotherapy were eligible for inclusion. In-depth semi-structured interviews were carried out with 17 patients with a median [range] age of 63 [41-72] years. Treatment was discontinued in seven patients. Verbatim transcripts of the audio-taped interviews were analysed using a constructivist grounded theory approach. Four conceptual categories emerged from data analysis, labelled "suffering from side effects" comprising a range of symptoms, psychosocial or role disturbances; "striving to cope with side effects" reflecting psychological strategies for managing side effects; "hoping" reflecting expectations about treatment efficacy and relief from side effects; and "appraisal of care." Among patients remaining in the trial, treatment was currently perceived as fairly tolerable. For most respondents, whether still in a trial or not, treatment discontinuation could not be justified by the non-tolerance of treatment side effects. These results question the adequacy of patient-perceived tolerance reports to determine an optimal drug dose for phase II trials. Confronted with patients' hopes and inappropriate beliefs, communication is challenging in phase I trials and could benefit from facilitating psychosocial interventions.

First-in-human phase I study of the DNA-repair inhibitor DT01 in combination with radiotherapy in patients with skin metastases from melanoma.

BACKGROUND: DT01 is a DNA-repair inhibitor preventing recruitment of DNA-repair enzymes at damage sites. Safety, pharmacokinetics and preliminary efficacy through intratumoural and peritumoural injections of DT01 were evaluated in combination with radiotherapy in a first-in-human phase I trial in patients with unresectable skin metastases from melanoma. METHODS: Twenty-three patients were included and received radiotherapy (30 Gy in 10 sessions) on all selected tumour lesions, comprising of two lesions injected with DT01 three times a week during the 2 weeks of radiotherapy. DT01 dose levels of 16, 32, 48, 64 and 96 mg were used, in a 3+3 dose escalation design, with an expansion cohort at 96 mg. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 180 days. All patients were evaluable for safety and pharmacokinetics. No dose-limiting toxicity was observed and the maximum-tolerated dose was not reached. Most frequent adverse events were reversible grades 1 and 2 injection site reactions. Pharmacokinetic analyses demonstrated a systemic passage of DT01. Twenty-one patients were evaluable for efficacy on 76 lesions. Objective response was observed in 45 lesions (59%), including 23 complete responses (30%). CONCLUSIONS: Intratumoural and peritumoural DT01 in combination with radiotherapy is safe and pharmacokinetic analyses suggest a systemic passage of DT01.

Statistical controversies in clinical research: requiem for the 3 + 3 design for phase I trials.

BACKGROUND: More than 95% of published phase I trials have used the 3 + 3 design to identify the dose to be recommended for phase II trials. However, the statistical community agrees on the limitations of the 3 + 3 design compared with model-based approaches. Moreover, the mechanisms of action of targeted agents strongly challenge the hypothesis that the maximum tolerated dose constitutes the optimal dose, and more outcomes including clinical and biological activity increasingly need to be taken into account to identify the optimal dose. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We review key elements from clinical publications and from the statistical literature to show that the 3 + 3 design lacks the necessary flexibility to address the challenges of targeted agents. RESULTS: The design issues raised by expansion cohorts, new definitions of dose-limiting toxicity and trials of combinations are not easily addressed by the 3 + 3 design or its extensions. CONCLUSIONS: Alternative statistical proposals have been developed to make a better use of the complex data generated by phase I trials. Their applications require a close collaboration between all actors of early phase clinical trials.

Designs of drug-combination phase I trials in oncology: a systematic review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: Combining several anticancer agents can increase the overall antitumor action, but at the same time, it can also increase the overall observed toxicity. Adaptive dose-escalation designs for drug combinations have recently emerged as an attractive alternative to algorithm-based designs, and they seem more effective in combination recommendations. These methods are not used in practice currently. Our aim is to describe international scientific practices in the setting of phase I drug combinations in oncology. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A bibliometric study on phase I dose-finding combination trials was conducted using the Medline(®) PubMed database between 1 January, 2011, and 31 December 2013. Sorting by abstract, we selected all papers involving a minimum of two agents and then retained only those in which at least two agents were dose-escalated. RESULTS: Among the 847 references retrieved, 162 papers reported drug-combination phase I trials in which at least two agents were dose-escalated. In 88% of trials, a traditional or modified 3 + 3 dose-escalation design was used. All except one trial used a design developed for single-agent evaluation. Our study suggests that drug-combination phase I trials in oncology are very safe, as revealed by the calculated median dose-limiting toxicity rate of 6% at the recommended dose, which is far below the target rate in these trials (33%). We also examined requirements of phase I clinical trials in oncology with drug combinations and the potential advantages of novel approaches in early phases. CONCLUSION: Efforts to promote novel and innovative approaches among statisticians and clinicians appear valuable. Adaptive designs have an important role to play in early phase development.

Designs of preoperative biomarkers trials in oncology: a systematic review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: The identification of predictive and pharmacodynamics (PD) biomarkers of efficacy of anticancer-targeted therapies is not always straightforward. To address this problem, preoperative trials have been set up. The present study aimed at evaluating how these trials are designed. DESIGN: We retrieved all preoperative oncology trials, defined as preoperative trials having a PD end point. RESULTS: Only 56 trials met our selection criteria. Of these, 27 trials (48%) were randomized. Forty-nine trials (88%) evaluated at least a noncytotoxic agent. In 37 trials (66%), a single agent was administered. The most prevalent tumor type was breast cancer (59%). Median duration of accrual was 28 months (range: 9-98). In these trials, there was a mean of two patients included per month (range: 0-7). The date of surgery was fixed before study entry in 35 trials (62%), while surgery was set up after preoperative therapy in the remaining 21 trials (38%). In the former trials, median duration of preoperative therapy was 17 days (range: 1-112), whereas in the latter trials it ranged from 4 to 29 weeks. The primary end point was a PD end point in 26 of the 45 trials (58%) in which it was mentioned. One percent of patients could not undergo surgery as per protocol due to an adverse event. Statistically significant predictive and PD biomarkers were identified in 17 (30%) and 27 trials (48%), respectively. CONCLUSION: Preoperative biomarkers trials are infrequent but safe and feasible. These trials often permit the identification of predictive and PD biomarkers.

A new approach to integrate toxicity grade and repeated treatment cycles in the analysis and reporting of phase I dose-finding trials.

BACKGROUND: Safety assessment beyond the dose-limiting toxicity evaluation period provides relevant information to define the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of a new treatment. We retrospectively analyzed three phase I trials to illustrate two indicators: per-cycle probability of graded toxicity and cumulative probability of severe toxicity over the treatment period. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data were collected from two continual reassessment method (CRM) trials (T1: aviscumine in solid tumors with short time on treatment; T2: erlotinib + radiotherapy in brainstem gliomas with longer time on treatment) and one 3 + 3 design (T3: liposomal doxorubicin + cyclophosphamide combination in ovarian carcinoma). The probability of severe and moderate or severe toxicity per cycle was estimated at each dose level with mixed proportional odds model. The cumulative probability of severe toxicity was also estimated with the time-to-event CRM. RESULTS: Eighty-three patients were included in the three trials; 94, 96 and 72 treatment cycles were administered, in T1, T2 and T3, respectively. Moderate toxicities were at least twice as frequent as severe toxicities. An increased probability of toxicity over time was detected in T3 [P = 0.04; per-cycle probability of severe toxicity: 27% (cycle 1) to 59% (cycle 6) at the RP2D]. At the RP2D, 37% of patients experienced at least one severe toxicity over the first six cycles in T2, and 78% in T3. CONCLUSIONS: Dedicated methods can be used to analyze toxicities from all cycles of treatment. They do not delay accrual and should be integrated in the analysis and reporting of phase I dose-finding trials.

Randomised proof-of-concept phase II trial comparing targeted therapy based on tumour molecular profiling vs conventional therapy in patients with refractory cancer: results of the feasibility part of the SHIVA trial.

BACKGROUND: The SHIVA trial is a multicentric randomised proof-of-concept phase II trial comparing molecularly targeted therapy based on tumour molecular profiling vs conventional therapy in patients with any type of refractory cancer. RESULTS of the feasibility study on the first 100 enrolled patients are presented. METHODS: Adult patients with any type of metastatic cancer who failed standard therapy were eligible for the study. The molecular profile was performed on a mandatory biopsy, and included mutations and gene copy number alteration analyses using high-throughput technologies, as well as the determination of oestrogen, progesterone, and androgen receptors by immunohistochemistry (IHC). RESULTS: Biopsy was safely performed in 95 of the first 100 included patients. Median time between the biopsy and the therapeutic decision taken during a weekly molecular biology board was 26 days. Mutations, gene copy number alterations, and IHC analyses were successful in 63 (66%), 65 (68%), and 87 (92%) patients, respectively. A druggable molecular abnormality was present in 38 patients (40%). CONCLUSIONS: The establishment of a comprehensive tumour molecular profile was safe, feasible, and compatible with clinical practice in refractory cancer patients.

A phase II trial of dacomitinib, an oral pan-human EGF receptor (HER) inhibitor, as first-line treatment in recurrent and/or metastatic squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck.

BACKGROUND: An open-label, multicenter, single-arm phase II trial was conducted to investigate the clinical activity of dacomitinib in recurrent/metastatic squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck (RM-SCCHN). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients were administered dacomitinib at 45 mg orally daily, in 21-day cycles. Primary end point was objective response rate. RESULTS: Sixty-nine patients were enrolled with a median age of 62 years. Among response-evaluable patients, 8 [12.7%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 5.6% to 23.5%] achieved a partial response and 36 (57.1%) had stable disease, lasting ≥24 weeks in 9 patients (14.3%). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 12.1 weeks and the median overall survival (OS) was 34.6 weeks. Most adverse events (AEs) were tolerable. The most common grade 3 or higher treatment-related AEs were diarrhea (15.9%), acneiform dermatitis (8.7%), and fatigue (8.7%). Treatment-related AEs led to at least one dose interruption in 28 (40.6%) patients and dose reductions in 26 (37.7%). Permanent treatment discontinuation occurred in 8 (11.6%) patients due to treatment-related AEs. CONCLUSIONS: Dacomitinib demonstrated clinical activity in RM-SCCHN, and the primary end point of this study was met. The toxicity profile of this agent was generally manageable with dose interruptions and adjustments.

Evaluation of the relevance of the growth modulation index (GMI) from the FFCD 0307 randomized phase III trial comparing the sequence of two chemotherapeutic regimens.

BACKGROUND: Precision medicine trials disrupted the paradigm of randomized controlled trials in large populations. Patient selection may be based on molecular alterations rather than on primary tumor location. In small patient populations, the growth modulation index (GMI) has been developed to evaluate treatment efficacy by using each patient as its own control. The FFCD 0307 randomized phase III trial compared two sequences of chemotherapy in advanced gastric cancer, which represents a unique opportunity to evaluate the relevance of the GMI. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In the FFCD 0307 trial, patients with advanced gastric cancer were randomized between two chemotherapy sequences [ECX followed by FOLFIRI at disease progression (arm A) versus FOLFIRI followed by ECX (arm B)]. GMI was defined as the ratio of the progression-free survival on second treatment (PFS2) to the time to progression on first treatment (TTP1). Sequence benefit was defined as a GMI exceeding 1.3 (GMI-high). GMI was correlated with overall survival (OS). OS1 and OS2 were measured from first randomization and second-line failure to death. RESULTS: Four hundred and sixteen patients were randomized (209 in arm A, 207 in arm B). One hundred and seventy-five patients (42%) received the two sequences and were assessable for GMI (97 in arm A, 79 in arm B). The median GMI was higher in arm A than in arm B (0.62 versus 0.47, P = 0.04). Patients with a high GMI had a longer OS1 (median 14.9 versus 11.5 months, NS). Median OS2 was doubled in the GMI-high group (3.4 versus 1.6 months, NS). CONCLUSION: GMI analyses suggest that ECX followed by FOLFIRI might represent a better therapeutic strategy than FOLFIRI followed by ECX. High GMI was associated with prolonged survival.

Inequality factors in access to early-phase clinical trials in oncology in France: results of the EGALICAN-2 study.

BACKGROUND: Investigation of the disparities in the access to experimental treatment in early-phase clinical trials is lacking. The objective of the EGALICAN-2 study was to identify the factors underpinning such inequalities. METHODS: A national prospective survey was conducted in 11 early-phase clinical trial centers (CLIP2) certified by the French National Cancer Institute. Sociodemographic, socioeconomic and medical data were collected. Univariate logistic regression models were carried out to estimate odds ratios and 90% confidence intervals associated with the effect of each study variable. A multivariate logistic regression model was built to explore the independent factors associated with the administration of the experimental treatment (C1D1). A post hoc analysis was carried out excluding female cancer patients. RESULTS: Between 2015 and 2016, 1355 patients referred from 11 CLIP2 centers in France were included in the study. Eight hundred and forty-eight patients received C1D1 (73%) and 320 patients (27%) were screening failure. Median age was 58 years (range 17-97 years) and 667 patients (54%) were female. Most patients had a metastatic disease (n = 751, 87%). In the multivariate logistic regression analysis, the significant independent factors associated with C1D1 were male sex, initial care received in a hospital with an early-phase unit and living in wealthy metropolitan areas (P values <0.05). In the post hoc analysis, the sex factor was no longer significant [odds ratio = 1.21 (95% confidence interval 0.86-1.70), P value = 0.271]. CONCLUSIONS: This study investigated the factors producing social inequalities in the context of early-phase clinical trials in oncology. Our research highlights factors of sex, care pathway and geographic location. Gynecological cancer was found to impact C1D1 significantly, unlike breast cancer. The results of this study should contribute to improve patient access to early-phase clinical trials.

Tumour growth kinetics assessment: added value to RECIST in cancer patients treated with molecularly targeted agents.

BACKGROUND: Treatment effect is categorised into four classes by RECIST based on the evolution of the size of target lesions and the occurrence of new lesions, irrespective of tumour growth kinetics before treatment. This study aimed at evaluating the added value of tumour growth kinetics assessment to RECIST in patients treated with molecularly targeted agents (MTAs). METHODS: On-study imaging, along with pre-baseline imaging, of patients treated with MTA(s) in clinical trials at Institut Curie were centrally reviewed. The tumour growth ratio (TGr), defined as the ratio of the slope of tumour growth before treatment and the slope of tumour growth on treatment between the nadir and disease progression, was calculated for each patient. RESULTS: A total of 50 patients included in 18 trials were eligible for the study. Among the 44 patients who withdrew from the study because of disease progression according to the investigators' assessment, 18 patients (41%) had a TGr <0.9. Among these 18 patients, 5 had disease progression according to RECIST 1.1 based on our retrospective reassessment of on-study imaging and occurrence of no new lesion during study treatment. CONCLUSION: Our preliminary results suggest that a substantial proportion of patients treated with MTAs have discontinued treatment although being potentially benefitted from them.