Phase 1A/1B dose-escalation and -expansion study to evaluate the safety, pharmacokinetics, food effects and antitumor activity of pamiparib in advanced solid tumours.

BACKGROUND: Pamiparib, a PARP1/2 inhibitor, demonstrated antitumor activity in preclinical models. METHODS: This Phase 1A/1B dose-escalation/dose-expansion study enrolled adults (≥18 years) with advanced/metastatic cancer. The dose-escalation phase evaluated the recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D), maximum tolerated dose (MTD), and pharmacokinetics; the dose-expansion phase evaluated the antitumor activity and food effects. RESULTS: Patients (N = 101) were enrolled in dose-escalation (n = 64) and dose-expansion (n = 37). During BID dose-escalation, dose-limiting toxicities were Grade 2 nausea (n = 1, 40 mg; n = 1, 80 mg); Grade 2 nausea and Grade 2 anorexia (n = 1, 120 mg), Grade 2 nausea, Grade 3 fatigue and Grade 3 paraesthesia (n = 1, 120 mg); MTD was 80 mg BID and RP2D was 60 mg BID. Common adverse events (AEs) were nausea (69.3%), fatigue (48.5%) and anaemia (35.6%); the most common Grade ≥3 AE was anaemia (24.8%). There was a dose-proportional increase in pamiparib exposure; no food effects on pharmacokinetics were observed. In the efficacy-evaluable population (n = 77), objective response rate (ORR) was 27.3% (95% CI, 17.7-38.6%). Median duration of response was 14.9 months (95% CI, 8.7-26.3). In the epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC)-evaluable population (n = 51), ORR was 41.2% (95% CI, 27.6-55.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Pamiparib was tolerated with manageable AEs, and antitumor activity was observed in patients with EOC. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT02361723.

Detection of clinical progression through plasma ctDNA in metastatic melanoma patients: a comparison to radiological progression.

BACKGROUND: The validity of circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) as an indicator of disease progression compared to medical imaging in patients with metastatic melanoma requires detailed evaluation. METHODS: Here, we carried out a retrospective ctDNA analysis of 108 plasma samples collected at the time of disease progression. We also analysed a validation cohort of 66 metastatic melanoma patients monitored prospectively after response to systemic therapy. RESULTS: ctDNA was detected in 62% of patients at the time of disease progression. For 67 patients that responded to treatment, the mean ctDNA level at progressive disease was significantly higher than at the time of response (P < 0.0001). However, only 30 of these 67 (45%) patients had a statistically significant increase in ctDNA by Poisson test. A validation cohort of 66 metastatic melanoma patients monitored prospectively indicated a 56% detection rate of ctDNA at progression, with only two cases showing increased ctDNA prior to radiological progression. Finally, a correlation between ctDNA levels and metabolic tumour burden was only observed in treatment naïve patients but not at the time of progression in a subgroup of patients failing BRAF inhibition (N = 15). CONCLUSIONS: These results highlight the low efficacy of ctDNA to detect disease progression in melanoma when compared mainly to standard positron emission tomography imaging.

First-in-human phase 1 study of budigalimab, an anti-PD-1 inhibitor, in patients with non-small cell lung cancer and head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Budigalimab is a humanized, recombinant immunoglobulin G1 monoclonal antibody targeting programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1). We present the safety, efficacy, pharmacokinetic (PK), and pharmacodynamic data from patients enrolled in the head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) expansion cohorts of the phase 1 first-in-human study of budigalimab monotherapy (NCT03000257; registered 15 December 2016). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with recurrent/metastatic HNSCC or locally advanced/metastatic NSCLC naive to PD-1/PD-1-ligand inhibitors were enrolled; patients were not selected on the basis of oncogene driver mutations or PD-L1 status. Budigalimab was administered at 250 mg intravenously Q2W or 500 mg intravenously Q4W until disease progression/unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoints were safety and PK; the secondary endpoint was efficacy. Exploratory endpoints included biomarker assessments. RESULTS: In total, 81 patients were enrolled (HNSCC: N = 41 [PD-L1 positive: n = 19]; NSCLC: N = 40 [PD-L1 positive: n = 16]); median treatment duration was 72 days (range, 1-617) and 71 days (range, 1-490) for the HNSCC and NSCLC cohorts, respectively. The most frequent grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse event was anemia (HNSCC: n = 9, 22%; NSCLC: n = 5, 13%). Both dosing regimens had comparable drug exposure and increased interferon gamma-induced chemokines, monokine induced by gamma interferon, and interferon-gamma-inducible protein 10. Objective response rates were 13% (90% CI, 5.1-24.5) in the HNSCC cohort and 19% (90% CI, 9.2-32.6) in the NSCLC cohort. Median progression-free survival was 3.6 months (95% CI, 1.7-4.7) and 1.9 months (95% CI, 1.7-3.7) in the HNSCC and NSCLC cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: The safety, efficacy and biomarker profiles of budigalimab are similar to other PD-1 inhibitors. Development of budigalimab in combination with novel anticancer agents is ongoing.

A Phase I, First-in-Human Study of GSK2849330, an Anti-HER3 Monoclonal Antibody, in HER3-Expressing Solid Tumors.

BACKGROUND: GSK2849330, an anti-HER3 monoclonal antibody that blocks HER3/Neuregulin 1 (NRG1) signaling in cancer cells, is engineered for enhanced antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity and complement-dependent cytotoxicity. This phase I, first-in-human, open-label study assessed the safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics, and preliminary activity of GSK2849330 in patients with HER3-expressing advanced solid tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with various tumor types were prospectively selected for HER3 expression by immunohistochemistry; a subset was also screened for NRG1 mRNA expression. In the dose-escalation phase, patients received GSK2849330 1.4-30 mg/kg every 2 weeks, or 3 mg/kg or 30 mg/kg weekly, intravenously (IV). In the dose-expansion phase, patients received 30 mg/kg GSK2849330 IV weekly. RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients with HER3-expressing cancers, of whom two expressed NRG1, received GSK2849330 (dose escalation: n = 18, dose expansion: n = 11). GSK2849330 was well tolerated. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed. The highest dose, of 30 mg/kg weekly, expected to provide full target engagement, was selected for dose expansion. Treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were mostly grade 1 or 2. The most common AEs were diarrhea (66%), fatigue (62%), and decreased appetite (31%). Dose-proportional plasma exposures were achieved, with evidence of HER3 inhibition in paired tissue biopsies. Of 29 patients, only 1 confirmed partial response, lasting 19 months, was noted in a patient with CD74-NRG1-rearranged non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). CONCLUSION: GSK2849330 demonstrated a favorable safety profile, dose-proportional PK, and evidence of target engagement, but limited antitumor activity in HER3-expressing cancers. The exceptional response seen in a patient with CD74-NRG1-rearranged NSCLC suggests further exploration in NRG1-fusion-positive cancers. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This first-in-human study confirms that GSK2849330 is well tolerated. Importantly, across a variety of HER3-expressing advanced tumors, prospective selection by HER3/NRG1 expression alone was insufficient to identify patients who could benefit from treatment with this antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity- and complement-dependent cytotoxicity-enhanced anti-HER3 antibody. The only confirmed durable response achieved was in a patient with CD74-NRG1-rearranged lung cancer. This highlights the potential utility of screening for NRG1 fusions prospectively across tumor types to enrich potential responders to anti-HER3 agents in ongoing trials.

Increased interdigitation zone visibility on optical coherence tomography following systemic fibroblast growth factor receptor 1-3 tyrosine kinase inhibitor anticancer therapy.

BACKGROUND: To describe ocular adverse events and retinal changes during fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitor (AZD4547) anticancer therapy. METHODS: This is a sub-study examining ocular adverse effects from AZD4547 therapy (single-centre, open-label, single arm phase II clinical trial). Comprehensive ocular examinations were performed 3 weekly in 24 patients. Macular optical coherence tomography (OCT) scan (300 × 250 ) was obtained at each visit and OCT parameters [central 1 mm retinal thickness (CRT) and total macular volume in central 6 mm] extracted. OCT scans were subdivided into outer (ELM to RPE) and inner (ELM to ILM) layers to compare outer and inner retinal changes. RESULTS: In 24 patients, AZD4547 was associated with eyelash elongation (n = 5, 21%) and punctate corneal erosion (n = 2, 8%). One patient developed clinically significant posterior capsular opacification during the study. OCT data were available in 23 patients, retinal changes ranged from an asymptomatic increased visibility of the interdigitation zone (IDZ) (n = 10, 43%) to multilobular subretinal fluid pockets (n = 5, 22%), which was associated with mild visual acuity loss. In a subset of patients (n = 9) with pre-AZD4547 dosing OCT baseline, CRT increased by mean (SD) of 9 (4) µm in those with IDZ change only compared with 64 (38) µm in those with other retinal changes. Retinal changes tended to be bilateral, self-limiting and improved over time without medical intervention. CONCLUSIONS: The ocular signs and symptoms did not result in dose cessation. Posteriorly, FGFR inhibition leads to outer retinal changes ranging from increased visibility of IDZ to distinct, multiple fluid pockets.

Adjuvant nivolumab versus ipilimumab in resected stage IIIB-C and stage IV melanoma (CheckMate 238): 4-year results from a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Previously, findings from CheckMate 238, a double-blind, phase 3 adjuvant trial in patients with resected stage IIIB-C or stage IV melanoma, showed significant improvements in recurrence-free survival and distant metastasis-free survival with nivolumab versus ipilimumab. This report provides updated 4-year efficacy, initial overall survival, and late-emergent safety results. METHODS: This multicentre, double-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial was done in 130 academic centres, community hospitals, and cancer centres across 25 countries. Patients aged 15 years or older with resected stage IIIB-C or IV melanoma and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive nivolumab or ipilimumab via an interactive voice response system and stratified according to disease stage and baseline PD-L1 status of tumour cells. Patients received intravenous nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks or intravenous ipilimumab 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses, and then every 12 weeks until 1 year of treatment, disease recurrence, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal of consent. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival by investigator assessment, and overall survival was a key secondary endpoint. Efficacy analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population (all randomly assigned patients). All patients who received at least one dose of study treatment were included in the safety analysis. The results presented in this report reflect the 4-year update of the ongoing study with a database lock date of Jan 30, 2020. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02388906. FINDINGS: Between March 30 and Nov 30, 2015, 906 patients were assigned to nivolumab (n=453) or ipilimumab (n=453). Median follow-up was 51·1 months (IQR 41·6-52·7) with nivolumab and 50·9 months (36·2-52·3) with ipilimumab; 4-year recurrence-free survival was 51·7% (95% CI 46·8-56·3) in the nivolumab group and 41·2% (36·4-45·9) in the ipilimumab group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·71 [95% CI 0·60-0·86]; p=0·0003). With 211 (100 [22%] of 453 patients in the nivolumab group and 111 [25%] of 453 patients in the ipilimumab group) of 302 anticipated deaths observed (about 73% of the originally planned 88% power needed for significance), 4-year overall survival was 77·9% (95% CI 73·7-81·5) with nivolumab and 76·6% (72·2-80·3) with ipilimumab (HR 0·87 [95% CI 0·66-1·14]; p=0·31). Late-emergent grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were reported in three (1%) of 452 and seven (2%) of 453 patients. The most common late-emergent treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events reported were diarrhoea, diabetic ketoacidosis, and pneumonitis (one patient each) in the nivolumab group, and colitis (two patients) in the ipilimumab group. Two previously reported treatment-related deaths in the ipilimumab group were attributed to study drug toxicity (marrow aplasia in one patient and colitis in one patient); no further treatment-related deaths were reported. INTERPRETATION: At a minimum of 4 years' follow-up, nivolumab demonstrated sustained recurrence-free survival benefit versus ipilimumab in resected stage IIIB-C or IV melanoma indicating a long-term treatment benefit with nivolumab. With fewer deaths than anticipated, overall survival was similar in both groups. Nivolumab remains an efficacious adjuvant treatment for patients with resected high-risk melanoma, with a safety profile that is more tolerable than that of ipilimumab. FUNDING: Bristol Myers Squibb and Ono Pharmaceutical.

Detection and prognostic role of heterogeneous populations of melanoma circulating tumour cells.

BACKGROUND: Circulating tumour cells (CTCs) can be assessed through a minimally invasive blood sample with potential utility as a predictive, prognostic and pharmacodynamic biomarker. The large heterogeneity of melanoma CTCs has hindered their detection and clinical application. METHODS: Here we compared two microfluidic devices for the recovery of circulating melanoma cells. The presence of CTCs in 43 blood samples from patients with metastatic melanoma was evaluated using a combination of immunocytochemistry and transcript analyses of five genes by RT-PCR and 19 genes by droplet digital PCR (ddPCR), whereby a CTC score was calculated. Circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) from the same patient blood sample, was assessed by ddPCR targeting tumour-specific mutations. RESULTS: Our analysis revealed an extraordinary heterogeneity amongst melanoma CTCs, with multiple non-overlapping subpopulations. CTC detection using our multimarker approach was associated with shorter overall and progression-free survival. Finally, we found that CTC scores correlated with plasma ctDNA concentrations and had similar pharmacodynamic changes upon treatment initiation. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the high phenotypic and molecular heterogeneity of melanoma CTCs, multimarker derived CTC scores could serve as viable tools for prognostication and treatment response monitoring in patients with metastatic melanoma.

PD-L1 Expression on Circulating Tumor Cells May Be Predictive of Response to Pembrolizumab in Advanced Melanoma: Results from a Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND: PD-1 inhibitors are routinely used for the treatment of advanced melanoma. This study sought to determine whether PD-L1 expression on circulating tumor cells (CTCs) can serve as a predictive biomarker of clinical benefit and response to treatment with the PD-1 inhibitor pembrolizumab. METHODS: Blood samples were collected from patients with metastatic melanoma receiving pembrolizumab, prior to treatment and 6-12 weeks after initiation of therapy. Multiparametric flow cytometry was used to identify CTCs and evaluate the expression of PD-L1. RESULTS: CTCs were detected in 25 of 40 patients (63%). Patients with detectable PD-L1+ CTCs (14/25, 64%) had significantly longer progression-free survival (PFS) compared with patients with PD-L1- CTCs (26.6 months vs. 5.5 months; p = .018). The 12-month PFS rates were 76% versus 22% in the PD-L1+ versus PD-L1- CTCs groups (p = .012), respectively. A multivariate linear regression analysis confirmed that PD-L1+ CTC is an independent predictive biomarker of PFS (hazard ratio, 0.229; 95% confidence interval, 0.052-1.012; p = .026). CONCLUSION: Our results reveal the potential of CTCs as a noninvasive real-time biopsy to evaluate PD-L1 expression in patients with melanoma. PD-L1 expression on CTCs may be predictive of response to pembrolizumab and longer PFS. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The present data suggest that PD-L1 expression on circulating tumor cells may predict response to pembrolizumab in advanced melanoma. This needs further validation in a larger trial and, if proven, might be a useful liquid biopsy tool that could be used to stratify patients into groups more likely to respond to immunotherapy, hence leading to health cost savings.

Pamiparib in combination with tislelizumab in patients with advanced solid tumours: results from the dose-escalation stage of a multicentre, open-label, phase 1a/b trial.

BACKGROUND: Rationale exists for combined treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors and poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors in a variety of solid tumours. This study aimed to investigate the safety and antitumour effects of pamiparib, an oral PARP 1/2 inhibitor, combined with tislelizumab, a humanised anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody, in patients with advanced solid tumours and to determine the optimum doses for further evaluation. METHODS: We did a multicentre, open-label, phase 1a/b study at five academic sites or community oncology centres in Australia. We recruited adults (aged ≥18 years) with advanced solid tumours who had received one or more previous lines of therapy, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score of 1 or less, and a life expectancy of 12 weeks or more. Patients were enrolled into one of five dose-escalation cohorts, with dose-escalation done in a 3 + 3 design. Cohorts 1-3 received intravenous tislelizumab 2 mg/kg every 3 weeks plus 20, 40, or 60 mg oral pamiparib twice daily, respectively; cohorts 4 and 5 received 200 mg intravenous tislelizumab every 3 weeks plus 40 or 60 mg oral pamiparib twice daily, respectively. The primary endpoints of the phase 1a dose-escalation part of the study were safety and tolerability, including the occurrence of dose-limiting toxicities and determination of the maximum tolerated dose and recommended phase 2 dose. All primary endpoints were analysed in the safety analysis set, which included all patients who received at least one dose of tislelizumab or pamiparib, with the exception of the occurrence of dose-limiting toxicities, which was analysed in the dose-limiting toxicity analysis set, which included all patients who received at least 90% of the first scheduled tislelizumab dose and at least 75% of scheduled pamiparib doses, or who had a dose-limiting toxicity event during cycle 1. Reported here are results of the phase 1a dose-escalation stage of the trial. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02660034, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Jan 22, 2016, and May 16, 2017, we enrolled 49 patients (median age 63 years [IQR 55-67]), all of whom received at least one dose of pamiparib or tiselzumab. Four patients had dose-limiting toxicities (intractable grade 2 nausea [n=1] and grade 3 rash [n=1] in cohort 4, and grade 2 nausea and vomiting [n=1] and grade 4 immune-mediated hepatitis [n=1] in cohort 5). The recommended phase 2 dose was tislelizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks plus pamiparib 40 mg twice daily (the dose given in cohort 4). The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were nausea (in 31 [63%] of 49 patients), fatigue (26 [53%]), diarrhoea (17 [35%]), and vomiting (15 [31%]). 23 (47%) of 49 patients had immune-related adverse events, of whom nine (39%) had asymptomatic grade 3-4 hepatic immune-related adverse events, which were reversible with corticosteroid treatment. The most common adverse event of grade 3 or worse severity was anaemia (in six [12%] patients) and no grade 5 adverse events were reported. Hepatitis or autoimmune hepatitis was the only serious adverse event to occur in two or more patients (in four [8%] patients). At a median follow-up of 8·3 months (IQR 4·8-12·8), ten (20%) of 49 patients achieved an objective response according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) version 1.1, including two complete responses and eight partial responses. INTERPRETATION: Pamiparib with tislelizumab was generally well tolerated and associated with antitumour responses and clinical benefit in patients with advanced solid tumours supporting further investigation of the combination of pamiparib with tislelizumab. FUNDING: BeiGene.

Programmed death ligand-1 expression in non-small cell lung cancer in a Western Australian population and correlation with clinicopathologic features.

Immune checkpoint inhibition is an important therapeutic option in patients with non-small cell lung cancer. Programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) expression may serve as a predictive marker for anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapies. The relationship between non-small cell lung cancer PD-L1 expression and clinicopathological characteristics remains unclear and there is no population level Australian data. We report the results of PD-L1 testing in patients with non-small cell lung cancer diagnosed at major Western Australian public hospitals served by a single state Pathology provider. We analyzed PD-L1 expression by immunohistochemistry in 241 non-small cell lung cancer specimens using the 22C3 clone on a Dako autostainer platform. Tumor cell PD-L1 expression was scored as Tumor Proportion Score and categorized using pre-specified subsets of 1%, 1-49% and ≥ 50% for correlation with clinicopathologic features. PD-L1 Tumor Proportion Score was 1% in 65 (27%) cases, 1-49% in 100 (41%) cases and ≥ 50% in 76 (32%) cases. PD-L1-positive rate was 92% in squamous cell carcinomas and 67% in adenocarcinomas. PD-L1 Tumor Proportion Score was higher in squamous cell carcinomas (p = 0.004) and lower in adenocarcinomas (p = 0.003). Of the 196 non-squamous carcinomas, 35% had rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog (RAS) mutations, 13% had epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations, 2% had anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) translocations and 2% had ROS1 translocations. Tumor Proportion Score ≥ 50% was seen in 34% (23/68), 28% (7/25) and 25% (1/4) of RAS, EGFR mutant, and ALK translocated carcinomas, respectively. There was no significant correlation between PD-L1 expression and molecular or genetic abnormalities, or other parameters including age, gender, stage, and smoking status. In our patient cohort, PD-L1 Tumor Proportion Score was significantly higher in squamous cell carcinomas and lower in adenocarcinomas. The overall prevalence of Tumor Proportion Score ≥ 50% is consistent with that reported in clinical trials.

Circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) as a biomarker in metachronous melanoma and colorectal cancer- a case report.

BACKGROUND: Circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) has emerged as a promising blood-based biomarker for monitoring disease status of patients with advanced cancers. The presence of ctDNA in the blood is a result of biological processes, namely tumour cell apoptosis and/or necrosis, and can be used to monitor different cancers by targeting cancer-specific mutation. CASE PRESENTATION: We present the case of a 67 year old Caucasian male that was initially treated with BRAF inhibitors followed by anti-CTLA4 and then anti-PD1 immunotherapy for metastatic melanoma but later developed colorectal cancer. The kinetics of ctDNA derived from each cancer type were monitored targeting BRAF V600R (melanoma) and KRAS G13D (colon cancer), specifically reflected the status of the patient's tumours. In fact, the discordant pattern of BRAF and KRAS ctDNA was significantly correlated with the clinical response of melanoma to pembrolizumab treatment and progression of colorectal cancer noted by PET and/or CT scan. Based on these results, ctDNA can be used to specifically clarify disease status of patients with metachronous cancers. CONCLUSIONS: Using cancer-specific mutational targets, we report here for the first time the efficacy of ctDNA to accurately provide a comprehensive outlook of the tumour status of two different cancers within one patient. Thus, ctDNA analysis has a potential clinical utility to delineate clinical information in patients with multiple cancer types.

Predictive value of PD-L1 and other clinical factors for chemoimmunotherapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

We investigate if PD-L1 expression and other clinical characteristics predict chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) benefits versus chemotherapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of CIT versus chemotherapy identified through electronic searches. In seven randomized controlled trials (n = 4170), CIT prolonged progression-free survival over chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.62; 95% CI: 0.58-0.67; p < 0.00001). The treatment benefits differed between PD-L1-high (HR: 0.41; 95% CI: 0.34-0.49) and PD-L1 low (HR: 0.63; 95% CI: 0.55-0.72; interaction-p = 0.00002) and PD-L1-high and PD-L1-negative (HR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.65-0.80; interaction-p < 0.00001). Similar benefits were observed regardless of gender, EGFR/ALK status and histological subtype. PD-L1 status is predictive of CIT benefit and may assist patient selection and design of future trials.

A Phase I study of the novel immunomodulatory agent PG545 (pixatimod) in subjects with advanced solid tumours.

BACKGROUND: PG545 (pixatimod) is a novel immunomodulatory agent, which has been demonstrated to stimulate innate immune responses against tumours in preclinical cancer models. METHODS: This Phase I study investigated the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and preliminary efficacy of PG545 monotherapy. Escalating doses of PG545 were administered to patients with advanced solid malignancies as a weekly 1-h intravenous infusion. RESULTS: Twenty-three subjects were enrolled across four cohorts (25, 50, 100 and 150 mg). Three dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs)-hypertension (2), epistaxis (1)-occurred in the 150 mg cohort. No DLTs were noted in the 100 mg cohort, which was identified as the maximum-tolerated dose. No objective responses were reported. Best response was stable disease up to 24 weeks, with the disease control rate in evaluable subjects of 38%. Exposure was proportional up to 100 mg and mean half-life was 141 h. The pharmacodynamic data revealed increases in innate immune cell activation, plasma IFNγ, TNFα, IP-10 and MCP-1. CONCLUSION: PG545 demonstrated a tolerable safety profile, proportional PK, evidence of immune cell stimulation and disease control in some subjects. Taken together, these data support the proposed mechanism of action, which represents a promising approach for use in combination with existing therapies.

Correlation between circulating tumour DNA and metabolic tumour burden in metastatic melanoma patients.

BACKGROUND: Circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) may serve as a measure of tumour burden and a useful tool for non-invasive monitoring of cancer. However, ctDNA is not always detectable in patients at time of diagnosis of metastatic disease. Therefore, there is a need to understand the correlation between ctDNA levels and the patients' overall metabolic tumour burden (MTB). METHODS: Thirty-two treatment naïve metastatic melanoma patients were included in the study. MTB and metabolic tumour volume (MTV) was measured by 18F-fluoro-D-glucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG PET/CT). Plasma ctDNA was quantified using droplet digital PCR (ddPCR). RESULTS: CtDNA was detected in 23 of 32 patients. Overall, a significant correlation was observed between ctDNA levels and MTB (p < 0.001). CtDNA was not detectable in patients with an MTB of ≤10, defining this value as the lower limit of tumour burden that can be detected through ctDNA analysis by ddPCR. CONCLUSIONS: We showed that ctDNA levels measured by ddPCR correlate with MTB in treatment naïve metastatic melanoma patients and observed a limit in tumour size for which ctDNA cannot be detected in blood. Nevertheless, our findings support the use of ctDNA as a non-invasive complementary modality to functional imaging for monitoring tumour burden.

Medical Oncology Group of Australia position statement and membership survey on voluntary assisted dying.

The controversial topic of voluntary assisted dying (VAD) is receiving significant attention at state government levels and in the community. Acknowledging potential legalisation of VAD, the Medical Oncology Group of Australia (MOGA) undertook a survey of members to inform the development of a position statement on the subject. All MOGA members were invited to complete an anonymous online survey. The survey comprised 12 closed-response categorical questions. Descriptive statistics were used to summarise the survey data. Majority views expressed in the survey would form the basis of a MOGA position statement on VAD. A total of 362 members completed the questionnaire, representing 55% of the membership; 47% of respondents disagreed with VAD; 36% agreed with VAD and the remaining members (17%) were 'neutral'. A clear majority position was not established. Only 14% agreed that physicians involved in VAD should be required personally to administer the lethal medication; 94% supported conscientious objection of physicians to the VAD process; 95% agreed that a palliative care physician consultation should be required and 86% agreed with the need for the involvement of specialist psychiatry medical services before a patient can be deemed as suitable for VAD. The MOGA membership expressed a range of views on the topic of VAD. A clear majority-held view to support a MOGA position that either supports or opposes VAD was not established. The position statement that flows from the survey encourages informed debate on this topic and brings into focus important considerations.

Combined BRAF and MEK inhibition versus BRAF inhibition alone in melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Combined BRAF and MEK inhibition, as compared with BRAF inhibition alone, delays the emergence of resistance and reduces toxic effects in patients who have melanoma with BRAF V600E or V600K mutations. METHODS: In this phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned 423 previously untreated patients who had unresectable stage IIIC or stage IV melanoma with a BRAF V600E or V600K mutation to receive a combination of dabrafenib (150 mg orally twice daily) and trametinib (2 mg orally once daily) or dabrafenib and placebo. The primary end point was progression-free survival. Secondary end points included overall survival, response rate, response duration, and safety. A preplanned interim overall survival analysis was conducted. RESULTS: The median progression-free survival was 9.3 months in the dabrafenib-trametinib group and 8.8 months in the dabrafenib-only group (hazard ratio for progression or death in the dabrafenib-trametinib group, 0.75; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.57 to 0.99; P=0.03). The overall response rate was 67% in the dabrafenib-trametinib group and 51% in the dabrafenib-only group (P=0.002). At 6 months, the interim overall survival rate was 93% with dabrafenib-trametinib and 85% with dabrafenib alone (hazard ratio for death, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.94; P=0.02). However, a specified efficacy-stopping boundary (two-sided P=0.00028) was not crossed. Rates of adverse events were similar in the two groups, although more dose modifications occurred in the dabrafenib-trametinib group. The rate of cutaneous squamous-cell carcinoma was lower in the dabrafenib-trametinib group than in the dabrafenib-only group (2% vs. 9%), whereas pyrexia occurred in more patients (51% vs. 28%) and was more often severe (grade 3, 6% vs. 2%) in the dabrafenib-trametinib group. CONCLUSIONS: A combination of dabrafenib and trametinib, as compared with dabrafenib alone, improved the rate of progression-free survival in previously untreated patients who had metastatic melanoma with BRAF V600E or V600K mutations. (Funded by GlaxoSmithKline; Clinical Trials.gov number, NCT01584648.).

Survey of practices around pharmaceutical company funding for continuing professional development among medical oncologists and trainees in Australia.

BACKGROUND: The completion of continuing professional development (CPD) is mandatory for medical oncologists and trainees (MO&T). Pharmaceutical companies may fund some CPD activities, but there is increasing debate about the potential for conflicts of interest (COI). AIM: To assess current practices around funding to attend CPD activities. METHODS: An electronic survey was distributed to Australian MO&T. The survey asked questions about current practices, institutional policies and perceptions about attending CPD funded by pharmaceutical companies. The design looked at comparing responses between MO&T as well as their understanding of and training around institutional and ethical process. RESULTS: A total of 157 of 653 (24%) responses was received, the majority from MO (76%). Most CPD activities attended by MO&T were self-funded (53%), followed by funding from institutions (19%), pharmaceutical companies (16%) and salary award (16%). Most institutions allowed MO&T to receive CPD funding from professional organisations (104/157, 66%) or pharmaceutical companies (90/157, 57%). A minority of respondents (13/157, 8%) reported that the process to use pharmaceutical funds had been considered by an ethics committee. Although 103/157 (66%) had received pharmaceutical funding for CPD, most (109/157, 69%) reported never receiving training about potential COI. The lack of education was more noticeable among trainees (odds ratio (OR) 8.61, P = 0.02). MO&T acknowledged the potential bias towards a pharmaceutical product (P = 0.05) but believed there was adequate separation between themselves and pharmaceutical companies (P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Majority of CPD attended by MO&T is self-funded. There is lack of clarity in institutional policies regarding external funding support for CPD activities. Formal education about potential COI is lacking.

Dabrafenib and trametinib versus dabrafenib and placebo for Val600 BRAF-mutant melanoma: a multicentre, double-blind, phase 3 randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Previously, a study of ours showed that the combination of dabrafenib and trametinib improves progression-free survival compared with dabrafenib and placebo in patients with BRAF Val600Lys/Glu mutation-positive metastatic melanoma. The study was continued to assess the secondary endpoint of overall survival, which we report in this Article. METHODS: We did this double-blind phase 3 study at 113 sites in 14 countries. We enrolled previously untreated patients with BRAF Val600Glu or Val600Lys mutation-positive unresectable stage IIIC or stage IV melanoma. Participants were computer-randomised (1:1) to receive a combination of dabrafenib (150 mg orally twice daily) and trametinib (2 mg orally once daily), or dabrafenib and placebo. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival and overall survival was a secondary endpoint. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01584648. FINDINGS: Between May 4, 2012, and Nov 30, 2012, we screened 947 patients for eligibility, of whom 423 were randomly assigned to receive dabrafenib and trametinib (n=211) or dabrafenib only (n=212). The final data cutoff was Jan 12, 2015, at which time 222 patients had died. Median overall survival was 25·1 months (95% CI 19·2-not reached) in the dabrafenib and trametinib group versus 18·7 months (15·2-23·7) in the dabrafenib only group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·71, 95% CI 0·55-0·92; p=0·0107). Overall survival was 74% at 1 year and 51% at 2 years in the dabrafenib and trametinib group versus 68% and 42%, respectively, in the dabrafenib only group. Based on 301 events, median progression-free survival was 11·0 months (95% CI 8·0-13·9) in the dabrafenib and trametinib group and 8·8 months (5·9-9·3) in the dabrafenib only group (HR 0·67, 95% CI 0·53-0·84; p=0·0004; unadjusted for multiple testing). Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 181 (87%) of 209 patients in the dabrafenib and trametinib group and 189 (90%) of 211 patients in the dabrafenib only group; the most common was pyrexia (108 patients, 52%) in the dabrafenib and trametinib group, and hyperkeratosis (70 patients, 33%) in the dabrafenib only group. Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 67 (32%) patients in the dabrafenib and trametinib group and 66 (31%) patients in the dabrafenib only group. INTERPRETATION: The improvement in overall survival establishes the combination of dabrafenib and trametinib as the standard targeted treatment for BRAF Val600 mutation-positive melanoma. Studies assessing dabrafenib and trametinib in combination with immunotherapies are ongoing. FUNDING: GlaxoSmithKline.

Cutaneous Metastatic Melanoma Resembling a Halo Nevus, in the Setting of PD-1 Inhibition.

Malignant melanoma is a common source of cutaneous metastases and can occasionally adopt a histological appearance which mimics a primary melanocytic lesion, either benign or malignant. The authors describe a case of new cutaneous deposits of metastatic melanoma in a 70-year-old woman with a prominent admixed lymphocytic infiltrate, imparting a striking resemblance to a halo nevus. The authors believe this appearance was a direct reflection of treatment with pembrolizumab, a humanized antibody against the immune checkpoint inhibitor programmed death-1. With increasing use of immune-modulating drugs, this potential histological mimic may be seen more frequently in the future.