Phase 3 Trial of Selpercatinib in Advanced RET-Mutant Medullary Thyroid Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Selpercatinib, a highly selective, potent RET inhibitor, has shown efficacy in advanced RET-mutant medullary thyroid cancer in a phase 1-2 trial, but its efficacy as compared with approved multikinase inhibitors is unclear. METHODS: We conducted a phase 3, randomized trial comparing selpercatinib as first-line therapy with the physician's choice of cabozantinib or vandetanib (control group). Eligible patients had progressive disease documented within 14 months before enrollment. The primary end point in the protocol-specified interim efficacy analysis was progression-free survival, assessed by blinded independent central review. Crossover to selpercatinib was permitted among patients in the control group after disease progression. Treatment failure-free survival, assessed by blinded independent central review, was a secondary, alpha-controlled end point that was to be tested only if progression-free survival was significant. Among the other secondary end points were overall response and safety. RESULTS: A total of 291 patients underwent randomization. At a median follow-up of 12 months, median progression-free survival as assessed by blinded independent central review was not reached in the selpercatinib group and was 16.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 12.2 to 25.1) in the control group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.16 to 0.48; P<0.001). Progression-free survival at 12 months was 86.8% (95% CI, 79.8 to 91.6) in the selpercatinib group and 65.7% (95% CI, 51.9 to 76.4) in the control group. Median treatment failure-free survival as assessed by blinded independent central review was not reached in the selpercatinib group and was 13.9 months in the control group (hazard ratio for disease progression, discontinuation due to treatment-related adverse events, or death, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.15 to 0.42; P<0.001). Treatment failure-free survival at 12 months was 86.2% (95% CI, 79.1 to 91.0) in the selpercatinib group and 62.1% (95% CI, 48.9 to 72.8) in the control group. The overall response was 69.4% (95% CI, 62.4 to 75.8) in the selpercatinib group and 38.8% (95% CI, 29.1 to 49.2) in the control group. Adverse events led to a dose reduction in 38.9% of the patients in the selpercatinib group, as compared with 77.3% in the control group, and to treatment discontinuation in 4.7% and 26.8%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Selpercatinib treatment resulted in superior progression-free survival and treatment failure-free survival as compared with cabozantinib or vandetanib in patients with RET-mutant medullary thyroid cancer. (Funded by Loxo Oncology, a subsidiary of Eli Lilly; LIBRETTO-531 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04211337.).

Nivolumab with or without ipilimumab in patients with recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer (CheckMate 358): a phase 1-2, open-label, multicohort trial.

BACKGROUND: In preliminary findings from the recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer cohort of CheckMate 358, nivolumab showed durable anti-tumour responses, and the combination of nivolumab plus ipilimumab showed promising clinical activity. Here, we report long-term outcomes from this cohort. METHODS: CheckMate 358 was a phase 1-2, open-label, multicohort trial. The metastatic cervical cancer cohort enrolled patients from 30 hospitals and cancer centres across ten countries. Female patients aged 18 years or older with a histologically confirmed diagnosis of squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix with recurrent or metastatic disease, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, and up to two previous systemic therapies were enrolled into the nivolumab 240 mg every 2 weeks group, the randomised groups (nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 6 weeks [NIVO3 plus IPI1] or nivolumab 1 mg/kg every 3 weeks plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four cycles then nivolumab 240 mg every 2 weeks [NIVO1 plus IPI3]), or the NIVO1 plus IPI3 expansion group. All doses were given intravenously. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to NIVO3 plus IPI1 or NIVO1 plus IPI3 via an interactive voice response system. Treatment continued until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or consent withdrawal, or for up to 24 months. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed objective response rate. Anti-tumour activity and safety were analysed in all treated patients. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02488759) and is now completed. FINDINGS: Between October, 2015, and March, 2020, 193 patients were recruited in the recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer cohort of CheckMate 358, of whom 176 were treated. 19 patients received nivolumab monotherapy, 45 received NIVO3 plus IPI1, and 112 received NIVO1 plus IPI3 (45 in the randomised group and 67 in the expansion group). Median follow-up times were 19·9 months (IQR 8·2-44·8) with nivolumab, 12·6 months (7·8-37·1) with NIVO3 plus IPI1, and 16·7 months (7·2-27·5) with pooled NIVO1 plus IPI3. Objective response rates were 26% (95% CI 9-51; five of 19 patients) with nivolumab, 31% (18-47; 14 of 45 patients) with NIVO3 plus IPI1, 40% (26-56; 18 of 45 patients) with randomised NIVO1 plus IPI3, and 38% (29-48; 43 of 112 patients) with pooled NIVO1 plus IPI3. The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were diarrhoea, hepatic cytolysis, hyponatraemia, pneumonitis, and syncope (one [5%] patient each; nivolumab group), diarrhoea, increased gamma-glutamyl transferase, increased lipase, and vomiting (two [4%] patients each; NIVO3 plus IPI1 group), and increased lipase (nine [8%] patients) and anaemia (seven [6%] patients; pooled NIVO1 plus IPI3 group). Serious treatment-related adverse events were reported in three (16%) patients in the nivolumab group, 12 (27%) patients in the NIVO3 plus IPI1 group, and 47 (42%) patients in the pooled NIVO1 plus IPI3 group. There was one treatment-related death due to immune-mediated colitis in the NIVO1 plus IPI3 group. INTERPRETATION: Nivolumab monotherapy and nivolumab plus ipilimumab combination therapy showed promise in the CheckMate 358 study as potential treatment options for recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer. Future randomised controlled trials of nivolumab plus ipilimumab or other dual immunotherapy regimens are warranted to confirm treatment benefit in this patient population. FUNDING: Bristol Myers Squibb and Ono Pharmaceutical.

Pembrolizumab plus concurrent chemoradiotherapy versus placebo plus concurrent chemoradiotherapy in patients with locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (KEYNOTE-412): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite multimodal therapy, 5-year overall survival for locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) is about 50%. We assessed the addition of pembrolizumab to concurrent chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced HNSCC. METHODS: In the randomised, double-blind, phase 3 KEYNOTE-412 trial, participants with newly diagnosed, high-risk, unresected locally advanced HNSCC from 130 medical centres globally were randomly assigned (1:1) to pembrolizumab (200 mg) plus chemoradiotherapy or placebo plus chemoradiotherapy. Randomisation was done using an interactive response technology system and was stratified by investigator's choice of radiotherapy regimen, tumour site and p16 status, and disease stage, with participants randomly assigned in blocks of four per stratum. Participants, investigators, and sponsor personnel were masked to treatment assignments. Local pharmacists were aware of assignments to support treatment preparation. Pembrolizumab and placebo were administered intravenously once every 3 weeks for up to 17 doses (one before chemoradiotherapy, two during chemoradiotherapy, 14 as maintenance therapy). Chemoradiotherapy included cisplatin (100 mg/m2) administered intravenously once every 3 weeks for two or three doses and accelerated or standard fractionation radiotherapy (70 Gy delivered in 35 fractions). The primary endpoint was event-free survival analysed in all randomly assigned participants. Safety was analysed in all participants who received at least one dose of study treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03040999, and is active but not recruiting. FINDINGS: Between April 19, 2017, and May 2, 2019, 804 participants were randomly assigned to the pembrolizumab group (n=402) or the placebo group (n=402). 660 (82%) of 804 participants were male, 144 (18%) were female, and 622 (77%) were White. Median study follow-up was 47·7 months (IQR 42·1-52·3). Median event-free survival was not reached (95% CI 44·7 months-not reached) in the pembrolizumab group and 46·6 months (27·5-not reached) in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·83 [95% CI 0·68-1·03]; log-rank p=0·043 [significance threshold, p≤0·024]). 367 (92%) of 398 participants treated in the pembrolizumab group and 352 (88%) of 398 participants treated in the placebo group had grade 3 or worse adverse events. The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were decreased neutrophil count (108 [27%] of 398 participants in the pembrolizumab group vs 100 [25%] of 398 participants in the placebo group), stomatitis (80 [20%] vs 69 [17%]), anaemia (80 [20%] vs 61 [15%]), dysphagia (76 [19%] vs 62 [16%]), and decreased lymphocyte count (76 [19%] vs 81 [20%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 245 (62%) participants in the pembrolizumab group versus 197 (49%) participants in the placebo group, most commonly pneumonia (43 [11%] vs 25 [6%]), acute kidney injury (33 [8%] vs 30 [8%]), and febrile neutropenia (24 [6%] vs seven [2%]). Treatment-related adverse events led to death in four (1%) participants in the pembrolizumab group (one participant each from aspiration pneumonia, end-stage renal disease, pneumonia, and sclerosing cholangitis) and six (2%) participants in the placebo group (three participants from pharyngeal haemorrhage and one participant each from mouth haemorrhage, post-procedural haemorrhage, and sepsis). INTERPRETATION: Pembrolizumab plus chemoradiotherapy did not significantly improve event-free survival compared with chemoradiotherapy alone in a molecularly unselected, locally advanced HNSCC population. No new safety signals were seen. Locally advanced HNSCC remains a challenging disease that requires better treatment approaches. FUNDING: Merck Sharp & Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck & Co, Rahway, NJ, USA.

Xevinapant plus radiotherapy in resected, high-risk, cisplatin-ineligible LA SCCHN: the phase III XRay Vision study design.

There is a significant unmet need and lack of treatment options for patients with resected, high-risk, cisplatin-ineligible locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (LA SCCHN). Xevinapant, a first-in-class, potent, oral, small-molecule IAP inhibitor, is thought to restore cancer cell sensitivity to chemotherapy and radiotherapy in clinical and preclinical studies. We describe the design of XRay Vision (NCT05386550), an international, randomized, double-blind, phase III study. Approximately 700 patients with resected, high-risk, cisplatin-ineligible LA SCCHN will be randomized 1:1 to receive 6 cycles of xevinapant or placebo, in combination with radiotherapy for the first 3 cycles. The primary end point is disease-free survival, and secondary end points include overall survival, health-related quality of life, and safety.

Squamous cell carcinoma is the most common form of head and neck cancer (SCCHN) and includes cancers of the lips, mouth, throat, tongue and voice box. It is called 'locally advanced' when the cancer has spread to nearby areas but not to other parts of the body. Few treatment options are available for people with locally advanced SCCHN who have had surgery and are unable to receive a type of chemotherapy called cisplatin. Xevinapant is being developed as a possible new type of cancer treatment. It is a liquid that is taken by mouth or given through a feeding tube. Adding xevinapant to the standard treatment ­ called radiotherapy ­ aims to make radiotherapy more effective against the cancer. Researchers have started a large, international, phase III study called XRay Vision to see if adding xevinapant to radiotherapy can help stop the cancer from coming back after surgery and help people live longer. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT05386550 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Current status and future perspective of postoperative treatment for locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck.

Surgery remains a foundation of treatment for locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. For postoperative patients at high risk of recurrence, however, surgery by itself is not enough, and improvement in survival requires postoperative treatment. Unlike the case with most other malignancies, the standard postoperative treatment for locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck patients with high-risk factors for recurrence is radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy with cisplatin. However, chemoradiotherapy with cisplatin at a dose of 100 mg/m2 once every 3 weeks has raised discussion over insufficient cisplatin delivery due to high-dose-related toxicity. As a possible solution, a recent randomized trial of the JCOG1008 has proved the non-inferiority of postoperative chemoradiotherapy with weekly cisplatin at a dose of 40 mg/m2 to 3-weekly cisplatin in terms of overall survival. Here, this review article focuses on current evidence and future perspectives of postoperative treatment for locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck.

Clinical impact of a dose-escalation strategy for lenvatinib in differentiated thyroid cancer.

BACKGROUND:  Treatment options for patients with differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC) who experience disease progression on lenvatinib treatment are limited. Although dose escalation of treatment with tyrosine kinase inhibitors at disease progression has been reported across cancer types, clinical significance in patients with DTC has not been investigated. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients with DTC who experienced disease progression on lenvatinib treatment from September 2011 to June 2022. We compared subjects who received dose-escalation treatment with standard treatment of termination at the time of initial disease progression. The escalated dose was decided by referencing to the previous effective and tolerated dose. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients were identified, 15 with dose escalation and 18 with lenvatinib termination. In both groups, the starting dose of lenvatinib was 24 mg/day, and the median dose at initial disease progression was 10 mg/day. In the former, the median dose escalation was 6 mg/day (range: 4-12). Objective response rate, clinical benefit rate by escalation, and median treatment duration of the dose-escalation phase were 13.3%, 73.3%, and 9.9 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 5.71-27.6), respectively. Median overall survival from initial disease progression was significantly longer in the dose-escalation group (median OS: 20.4 months [95% CI 7.0-NA] vs. 3.9 months [95% CI 1.7-7.9], log-rank p-value; 0.0004, hazard ratio; 0.22 [95% CI 0.09-0.55]). There were no grade 5 adverse events, and one patient discontinued due to a grade 3 lung abscess. CONCLUSION: The dose-escalation strategy appears to be a safe and effective treatment option after disease progression in patients treated with lenvatinib for DTC.

First-line pembrolizumab with or without chemotherapy for recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: 5-year follow-up of the Japanese population of KEYNOTE­048.

BACKGROUND: Previously reported results from phase III KEYNOTE-048 demonstrated similar or improved overall survival (OS) with pembrolizumab or pembrolizumab-chemotherapy versus cetuximab-chemotherapy (EXTREME) in Japanese patients with recurrent/metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (R/M HNSCC). We report results in Japanese patients from KEYNOTE-048 after 5 years of follow-up. METHODS: Patients with R/M HNSCC of the oropharynx, oral cavity, hypopharynx, or larynx were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to pembrolizumab, pembrolizumab-chemotherapy, or EXTREME. Primary endpoints were OS and progression-free survival. Efficacy was evaluated in the programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) combined positive score (CPS) ≥ 20, PD-L1 CPS ≥ 1, and total Japanese populations. RESULTS: In Japan, 67 patients were enrolled (pembrolizumab, n = 23; pembrolizumab-chemotherapy, n = 25; EXTREME, n = 19). Median follow-up was 71.0 months (range, 61.2-81.5); data cutoff, February 21, 2022. 5-year OS rates with pembrolizumab versus EXTREME were 35.7% versus 12.5% (hazard ratio [HR] 0.38; 95% CI 0.13-1.05), 23.8% versus 12.5% (HR 0.70; 95% CI 0.34-1.45), and 30.4% versus 10.5% (HR 0.54; 95% CI 0.27-1.07) in the PD-L1 CPS ≥ 20, CPS ≥ 1, and total Japanese populations, respectively. 5-year OS rates with pembrolizumab-chemotherapy versus EXTREME were 20.0% versus 14.3% (HR 0.79; 95% CI 0.27-2.33), 10.5% versus 14.3% (HR 1.18; 95% CI 0.56-2.48), and 8.0% versus 12.5% (HR 1.11; 95% CI 0.57-2.16) in the PD-L1 CPS ≥ 20, CPS ≥ 1, and total Japanese populations, respectively. CONCLUSION: After 5 years of follow-up, pembrolizumab and pembrolizumab-chemotherapy showed long-term clinical benefits; results further support these treatments as first-line options for Japanese patients with R/M HNSCC. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02358031.

Efficacy and safety of adapalene gel as a reactive treatment for cetuximab-induced skin toxicity in recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: A historical cohort comparison study.

INTRODUCTION: Despite the common occurrence of cetuximab (Cmab)-induced skin toxicity, management strategies are not well established. The traditional mainstay method consists of topical steroids, which, if used excessively, may give rise to other concerns. Alternatively, adapalene can activate epidermal growth factor receptor pathways to potentially alleviate these toxicities. METHODS: We prospectively studied 31 patients with recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (R/M SCCHN) who were eligible to use adapalene gel as a reactive treatment for topical steroid-refractory skin toxicity. For comparison, we retrospectively reviewed 99 patients with R/M SCCHN (historical control cohort) whose skin toxicity was mainly treated with topical steroids. We compared the frequency and severity of Cmab-induced skin toxicity, Cmab therapy status (e.g., dose modification), side effects caused by topical steroids and adapalene gel itself, and other medical interventions. RESULTS: Adapalene gel was used by eight patients (25.8%) in the prospective cohort. Patients in the historical control cohort more frequently required escalation of topical steroid potency (34.3% vs. 12.9%, p = 0.022). Although there was no statistically significant difference in the frequency of grade ≥3 facial skin rash and paronychia between the two cohorts, the prospective cohort showed a significantly shorter time to complete recovery from grade 2/3 paronychia (16 vs. 47 days, p = 0.017). Further, while no skin infections were observed in the prospective cohort, 13 patients in the historical control cohort developed skin infections, especially periungual infection (0% vs. 13.1%, p = 0.024). In addition, no patients in the prospective cohort received a dose reduction of Cmab due to skin toxicities, compared to 20 patients in the historical control cohort (0% vs. 20.2%, p = 0.003). No apparent adapalene gel-related side effects were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Adapalene gel may be an effective management option for topical steroid-refractory Cmab-induced skin toxicities and could improve compliance with Cmab therapy.

Larotrectinib efficacy and safety in adult patients with tropomyosin receptor kinase fusion sarcomas.

BACKGROUND: Larotrectinib, a first-in-class, highly selective tropomyosin receptor kinase (TRK) inhibitor, has demonstrated efficacy in adult and pediatric patients with various solid tumors harboring NTRK gene fusions. This subset analysis focuses on the efficacy and safety of larotrectinib in an expanded cohort of adult patients with TRK fusion sarcomas. METHODS: Patients (≥18 years old) with sarcomas harboring NTRK gene fusions were identified from three clinical trials. Patients received larotrectinib 100 mg orally twice daily. Response was investigator-assessed per RECIST v1.1. Data cutoff was July 20, 2021. RESULTS: At the data cutoff, 36 adult patients with TRK fusion sarcomas had initiated larotrectinib therapy: two (6%) patients had bone sarcomas, four (11%) had gastrointestinal stromal tumors, and 30 (83%) had soft tissue sarcomas. All patients were evaluable for response and demonstrated an objective response rate of 58% (95% confidence interval, 41-74). Patients responded well to larotrectinib regardless of number of prior lines of therapy. Adverse events (AEs) were mostly grade 1/2. Grade 3 treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) occurred in 15 (42%) patients. There were no grade 4 TEAEs. Two grade 5 TEAEs were reported, neither of which were considered related to larotrectinib. Four (11%) patients permanently discontinued treatment due to TEAEs. CONCLUSIONS: Larotrectinib demonstrated robust and durable responses, extended survival benefit, and a favorable safety profile in adult patients with TRK fusion sarcomas with longer follow-up. These results continue to demonstrate that testing for NTRK gene fusions should be incorporated into the clinical management of adult patients with various types of sarcomas. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Tropomyosin receptor kinase (TRK) fusion proteins result from translocations involving the NTRK gene and cause cancer in a range of tumor types. Larotrectinib is an agent that specifically targets TRK fusion proteins and is approved for the treatment of patients with TRK fusion cancer. This study looked at how well larotrectinib worked in adult patients with sarcomas caused by TRK fusion proteins. Over half of patients had a durable response to larotrectinib, with no unexpected side effects. These results show that larotrectinib is safe and effective in adult patients with TRK fusion sarcomas.

Potential efficacy of local therapy for progressive lesions after nivolumab in patients with recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck.

BACKGROUND: In recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (R/M SCCHN), local therapy (LT) such as surgery or radiotherapy can be treatment options for improved survival or quality of life. To date, however, few reports have addressed the efficacy of LT for sites of disease progression after immune checkpoint inhibitors, including other cancers. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients with R/M SCCHN originating from the oral cavity, oropharynx, hypopharynx, and larynx and treated with nivolumab. We extracted patients undergoing salvage LT or palliative radiotherapy (RT) to the selected progressive lesion at any time after initiation of nivolumab. RESULTS: Twenty-four patients received LT. Salvage LT was performed in 9 (37.5%) patients, including surgery and definitive RT in 5 and 4 patients, respectively. Palliative RT was performed in 15 (62.5%) patients. LT was provided in 10 (41.7%) patients for oligoprogressive disease. Twelve (50.0%) patients received subsequent systemic therapy immediately after LT. Classification based on patient treatment divided the population into four subgroups with different prognoses (salvage LT followed by subsequent systemic therapy [n = 3], salvage LT alone [n = 6], palliative RT followed by subsequent systemic therapy [n = 9], and palliative RT alone [n = 6]). Median OS in this order was 24.5, 9.0, 7.3, and 2.4 months (p = 0.001). All patients in the salvage LT followed by subsequent systemic therapy group continued nivolumab. CONCLUSION: In R/M SCCHN patients who have received nivolumab, salvage LT for the selected progressive lesion with continuation of nivolumab potentially provides an excellent survival prognosis.

Impact of baseline tumor burden on overall survival in patients with radioiodine-refractory differentiated thyroid cancer treated with lenvatinib in the SELECT global phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Radioiodine-refractory differentiated thyroid cancer (RAI-R DTC) is an aggressive form of thyroid cancer. Lenvatinib is a multikinase inhibitor approved for treatment of RAI-R DTC. The impact of tumor response and tumor burden on overall survival (OS) after lenvatinib treatment in patients with RAI-R DTC was assessed. METHODS: Data from patients treated with lenvatinib (N = 261) in SELECT were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into lenvatinib responder or nonresponder subgroups and into low (≤40 mm) or high (>40 mm) tumor burden subgroups based on baseline sums of diameters of target lesions using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1 (cutoff values were determined by receiver-operating characteristic analyses). Associations of tumor response and tumor burden with OS were assessed. RESULTS: Median OS was prolonged in lenvatinib responders versus nonresponders (52.2 vs 19.0 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.32; 95% CI, 0.23-0.46). Patients with a lower tumor burden who received lenvatinib had prolonged OS versus those with a higher tumor burden (median OS, not reached vs 29.1 months, respectively; HR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.28-0.63). Baseline tumor burden was associated with OS by multivariate analysis (HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.35-0.89; P = .0138). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with a lower tumor burden receiving lenvatinib had prolonged OS compared with those with a higher tumor burden receiving lenvatinib. Baseline tumor burden may be a prognostic factor for OS in patients with RAI-R DTC treated with lenvatinib.

Lenvatinib for the Treatment of Radioiodine-Refractory Differentiated Thyroid Cancer: Treatment Optimization for Maximum Clinical Benefit.

BACKGROUND: Lenvatinib is a multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor approved for treating patients with locally recurrent or metastatic progressive radioiodine-refractory differentiated thyroid cancer (RR-DTC). In this review, we discuss recent developments in the optimization of RR-DTC treatment with lenvatinib. SUMMARY: Initiation of lenvatinib treatment before a worsening of Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status and elevated neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio could benefit patients with progressive RR-DTC. The median duration of response with lenvatinib was inversely correlated with a smaller tumor burden, and prognosis was significantly worse in patients with a high tumor burden. An 18 mg/day starting dose of lenvatinib was not noninferior to 24 mg/day and had a comparable safety profile. Timely management of adverse events is crucial, as patients with shorter dose interruptions benefitted more from lenvatinib treatment. Caution should be exercised when initiating lenvatinib in patients who have tumor infiltration into the trachea or other organs, or certain histological subtypes of DTC, as these are risk factors for fistula formation or organ perforation. The Study of (E7080) LEnvatinib in Differentiated Cancer of the Thyroid (SELECT) eligibility criteria should be considered prior to initiating lenvatinib treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence indicates that patients benefit most from lenvatinib treatment that is initiated earlier in advanced disease when the disease burden is low. A starting dose of lenvatinib 24 mg/day, with dose modifications as required, yields better outcomes as compared to 18 mg/day. Appropriate supportive care, including timely identification of adverse events, is essential to manage toxicities associated with lenvatinib, avoid longer dose interruptions, and maximize efficacy.

Long-term Outcomes with Nivolumab as First-line Treatment in Recurrent or Metastatic Head and Neck Cancer: Subgroup Analysis of CheckMate 141.

In the randomized, phase 3 CheckMate 141 trial, nivolumab significantly improved overall survival (OS) versus investigator's choice (IC) of chemotherapy at primary analysis among 361 patients with recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (R/M SCCHN) post-platinum therapy. Nivolumab versus IC as first-line treatment also improved OS among patients with R/M SCCHN who progressed on platinum therapy for locally advanced disease in the adjuvant or primary setting at 1-year follow-up. In the present long-term follow-up analysis of patients receiving first-line treatment, OS benefit with nivolumab (n = 50) versus IC (n = 26) was maintained (median: 7.7 months versus 3.3 months; hazard ratio: 0.56; 95% confidence interval, 0.34-0.94) at 2 years. No new safety signals were identified. In summary, this long-term 2-year analysis of CheckMate 141 supports the use of nivolumab as a first-line treatment for patients with platinum-refractory R/M SCCHN.

Larotrectinib Treatment for Patients With TRK Fusion-Positive Salivary Gland Cancers.

BACKGROUND: Larotrectinib is a first-in-class, highly selective, and central nervous system-active tropomyosin receptor kinase (TRK) inhibitor approved for the treatment of adult and pediatric patients with TRK fusion cancer. We report the efficacy and safety of larotrectinib in patients with TRK fusion-positive salivary gland cancers. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with TRK fusion-positive salivary gland cancer treated with larotrectinib were identified from two clinical trials (NCT02122913 and NCT02576431). Patients received larotrectinib 100 mg twice daily (BID) except for one patient who received 150 mg BID in the phase I trial. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) as assessed by the investigator using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. RESULTS: At the data cut-off (July 20, 2020), 24 patients with TRK fusion-positive salivary gland cancer had been treated. The most common histologies were secretory carcinoma (54%), adenocarcinoma (25%), and mucoepidermoid carcinoma (13%). All 24 patients had an ETV6-NTRK3 gene fusion. The ORR was 92% (95% confidence interval, 73-99). Best overall response was complete response in three (13%) patients, partial response in 19 (79%), and progressive disease in two (8%). The rate of progression-free survival at 24 months was 78% (median follow-up 30.9 months). Most treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were grade 1-2, and no patients discontinued treatment due to AEs. CONCLUSION: Larotrectinib demonstrated robust and durable efficacy in patients with TRK fusion-positive salivary gland tumors of various histologies, and a favorable safety profile. These findings support NTRK gene fusion testing in patients with advanced salivary gland cancers. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV NUMBERS: NCT02122913 and NCT02576431.

LIBRETTO-531: a phase III study of selpercatinib in multikinase inhibitor-naïve RET-mutant medullary thyroid cancer.

Selpercatinib is a first-in-class, highly selective and potent, central nervous system-active RET kinase inhibitor. In the phase I/II trial, selpercatinib demonstrated clinically meaningful antitumor activity with manageable toxicity in heavily pre-treated and treatment-naive patients with RET-mutant medullary thyroid cancer (MTC). LIBRETTO-531 (NCT04211337) is a multicenter, open-label, randomized, controlled, phase III trial comparing selpercatinib to cabozantinib or vandetanib in patients with advanced/metastatic RET-mutant MTC. The primary objective is to compare progression-free survival (per RECIST 1.1) by blinded independent central review of patients with progressive, advanced, multikinase inhibitor-naive, RET-mutant MTC treated with selpercatinib versus cabozantinib or vandetanib. Key secondary objectives are to compare other efficacy outcomes (per RECIST 1.1) and tolerability of selpercatinib versus cabozantinib or vandetanib.

Selpercatinib (also known by the brand name Retevmo^®/Retsevmo^®) is a new treatment available in multiple countries for people with advanced or metastatic RET-mutant medullary thyroid cancer (MTC). Thyroid cancer starts in your thyroid gland and may spread or metastasize to other parts of the body, including lungs, bones, and occasionally the brain, which means the cancer is likely to be advanced. Advanced thyroid cancer can be driven by a gene in your body, one of which is RET. This is a summary of the LIBRETTO-531 study which compares selpercatinib, which is a strong and selective inhibitor of RET, with two approved drugs, cabozantinib and vandetanib. Patients with advanced or metastatic RET-mutant MTC who have not already received treatment with kinase inhibitors are being enrolled. This trial will evaluate how long people during and after treatment live with the disease without it getting worse. Selpercatinib may affect both healthy cells and tumor cells, which can result in side effects, which will also be evaluated in this study. This study is active and currently recruiting new patients. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04211337 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Systemic therapy for salivary gland malignancy: current status and future perspectives.

Salivary gland malignancies are rare neoplasms that have a broad histological spectrum and a variety of biologic behaviors. Salivary gland malignancies are known as chemo-resistant tumors, which render optimal treatment challenging. This review summarizes the role of systemic therapy for salivary gland malignancies. To date, the advantage of adding concurrent chemotherapy has remained undefined for both postoperative and inoperable locally advanced salivary gland malignancy patients undergoing radiotherapy. For recurrent/metastatic disease, local and/or systemic treatment options should be discussed in a multidisciplinary setting with consideration to both patient needs and tumor factors. For symptomatic patients or those who may compromise organ function, palliative systemic therapy can be a reasonable option based on the results of phase II studies. Platinum combination regimens as first-line therapy have been widely accepted. Personalized therapies have become established options, particularly for androgen receptor-positive, HER2-positive and NTRK fusion-positive salivary gland malignancies (i.e. androgen receptor and HER2 in salivary duct carcinoma and NTRK3 in secretory carcinoma). For patients with adenoid cystic carcinoma, multi-targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitors have also been developed. Anti-PD1 checkpoint inhibitors have shown limited activity to date. Investigation of active systemic treatments for salivary gland malignancy remains a significant unmet need. Future directions might include a more comprehensive genomic screening approach (usually next-generation sequencing-based) and combination strategies using immune checkpoint inhibitors. These are rare malignancies that require ongoing effort in the conduct of high-quality clinical trials.

Human papillomavirus-related oropharyngeal carcinoma.

It was not until around 2000 that human papillomavirus-related oropharyngeal carcinoma was recognized as carcinoma with clinical presentations different from nonrelated head and neck carcinoma. Twenty years after and with the revision of the tumor-node-metastasis classification in 2017, various clinical trials focused on human papillomavirus-related oropharyngeal carcinoma to improve the prognosis and quality of life of patients with this disease. However, the incidence of human papillomavirus-related cancers is increasing, which is expected to be particularly prominent in Japan, where human papillomavirus vaccination is not widely available. In this review, we describe the current status of clinical trials (mainly focused on initial surgery and radiation dose reduction) for, primary and secondary prevention of, and the present status of human papillomavirus-related oropharyngeal carcinoma in Japan.

Biweekly administration of cetuximab in Japanese patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck cancer.

BACKGROUND: Cetuximab (Cmab) plays an important role in the treatment for recurrent or metastatic head and neck cancer (R/M HNC). To date, however, no safety data on biweekly administration of cetuximab at a dose of 500 mg/m2 (biweekly Cmab) for Japanese HNC patients have been available. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the clinical records of five R/M HNC patients who received biweekly Cmab in our institute between January 2016 and September 2021 and compared the safety profile between two phases of weekly 250 mg/m2 and biweekly 500 mg/m2 Cmab in the identical patients. RESULTS: All patients initially received Cmab in combination with chemotherapy. Chemotherapy consisted of paclitaxel plus carboplatin in two patients, cisplatin + 5-FU in one patient, and paclitaxel in two patients. Three patients switched treatment schedule from weekly Cmab to biweekly Cmab, while two patients received biweekly Cmab after completion of chemotherapy. The main reason for switching to biweekly Cmab was an unacceptably long commuting time to the hospital. The median duration of Cmab was 217 days (49-321) during weekly Cmab with or without chemotherapy and 42 days (28-175) during biweekly Cmab. Median dose of biweekly Cmab was 4 (3-12). During biweekly Cmab, worsened (Grade ≥ 2) toxicities were observed in two patients: one with grade 2 dry skin and the second with grade 2 skin infection. None developed grade ≥ 3 adverse events or discontinued treatment due to Cmab-related adverse events. CONCLUSION: Biweekly Cmab was well tolerated and did not demonstrate severe toxicities related to Cmab for R/M HNC.

Avelumab plus standard-of-care chemoradiotherapy versus chemoradiotherapy alone in patients with locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Chemoradiotherapy is the standard of care for unresected locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. We aimed to assess if addition of avelumab (anti-PD-L1) to chemoradiotherapy could improve treatment outcomes for this patient population. METHODS: In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study, patients were recruited from 196 hospitals and cancer treatment centres in 22 countries. Patients aged 18 years or older, with histologically confirmed, previously untreated, locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the oropharynx, hypopharynx, larynx, or oral cavity (unselected for PD-L1 status), an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 or 1, and who could receive chemoradiotherapy were eligible. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) centrally by means of stratified block randomisation with block size four (stratified by human papillomavirus status, tumour stage, and nodal stage, and done by an interactive response technology system) to receive 10 mg/kg avelumab intravenously every 2 weeks plus chemoradiotherapy (100 mg/m2 cisplatin every 3 weeks plus intensity-modulated radiotherapy with standard fractionation of 70 Gy [35 fractions during 7 weeks]; avelumab group) or placebo plus chemoradiotherapy (placebo group). This was preceded by a single 10 mg/kg avelumab or placebo lead-in dose given 7 days previously and followed by 10 mg/kg avelumab or placebo every 2 weeks maintenance therapy for up to 12 months. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival by investigator assessment per modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1, in all randomly assigned patients. Adverse events were assessed in patients who received at least one dose of avelumab or placebo. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02952586. Enrolment is no longer ongoing, and the trial has been discontinued. FINDINGS: Between Dec 12, 2016, and Jan 29, 2019, from 907 patients screened, 697 patients were randomly assigned to the avelumab group (n=350) or the placebo group (n=347). Median follow-up for progression-free survival was 14·6 months (IQR 8·5-19·6) in the avelumab group and 14·8 months (11·6-18·8) in the placebo group. Median progression-free survival was not reached (95% CI 16·9 months-not estimable) in the avelumab group and not reached (23·0 months-not estimable) in the placebo group (stratified hazard ratio 1·21 [95% CI 0·93-1·57] favouring the placebo group; one-sided p=0·92). The most common grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events were neutropenia (57 [16%] of 348 patients in the avelumab group vs 52 [15%] of 344 patients in the placebo group), mucosal inflammation (50 [14%] vs 45 [13%]), dysphagia (49 [14%] vs 47 [14%]), and anaemia (41 [12%] vs 44 [13%]). Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 124 (36%) patients in the avelumab group and in 109 (32%) patients in the placebo group. Treatment-related deaths occurred in two (1%) patients in the avelumab group (due to general disorders and site conditions, and vascular rupture) and one (<1%) in the placebo group (due to acute respiratory failure). INTERPRETATION: The primary objective of prolonging progression-free survival with avelumab plus chemoradiotherapy followed by avelumab maintenance in patients with locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck was not met. These findings may help inform the design of future trials investigating the combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors plus CRT. FUNDING: Pfizer and Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany.

A management of neutropenia using granulocyte colony stimulating factor support for chemotherapy consisted of docetaxel, cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil in patients with oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: An exploratory study was designed to evaluate the efficacy of granulocyte colony stimulating factor support for chemotherapy consisting of docetaxel, cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil chemotherapy in patients with oesophageal cancer. METHODS: The inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma, (2) a schedule to receive three courses of induction chemotherapy (docetaxel 75 mg/m2 day 1, cisplatin 75 mg/m2 day 1, 5-fluorouracil 750 mg/m2 days 1-5, every 3 weeks), (3) stage IB-III, (4) 20-75 years old, (5) 0-1 performance status, (6) preserved organ functions and (7) written informed consent. The endpoints were to evaluate the efficacy of granulocyte colony stimulating factor support including secondary prophylactic usage for docetaxel, cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil chemotherapy. Patients who previously had 'febrile neutropenia', or 'Grade 3 or 4 infection accompanied by grade 3 or 4 neutropenia' prophylactically received granulocyte colony stimulating factor support from day 7. RESULTS: A total of 91 patients were included in the analysis. Granulocyte colony stimulating factor support was given to 81.3%. The incidence of grade 4 neutropenia and febrile neutropenia were 81.3 and 32.9%, respectively. The dose of anticancer agents was reduced in 48.4%. There were no treatment-related deaths. The relative dose intensity of docetaxel, cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil were 92.7 ± 9.8%, 86.0 ± 15.6% and 91.8 ± 10.0%, respectively. In the secondary prophylactic granulocyte colony stimulating factor support group, the neutrophil count significantly increased between day 7 and day 13 as compared with the non-prophylactic granulocyte colony stimulating factor support group (P < 0.05 for each day). CONCLUSIONS: Granulocyte colony stimulating factor support including secondary prophylactic usage may be feasible for maintaining the intensity of docetaxel, cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil chemotherapy in patients with oesophageal cancer.