Evaluation of the Durability of the Immune Humoral Response to COVID-19 Vaccines in Patients With Cancer Undergoing Treatment or Who Received a Stem Cell Transplant.

Importance: The durability of the antibody response to COVID-19 vaccines in patients with cancer undergoing treatment or who received a stem cell transplant is unknown and may be associated with infection outcomes. Objective: To evaluate anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein receptor binding domain (anti-RBD) and neutralizing antibody (nAb) responses to COVID-19 vaccines longitudinally over 6 months in patients with cancer undergoing treatment or who received a stem cell transplant (SCT). Design, Setting, and Participants: In this prospective, observational, longitudinal cross-sectional study of 453 patients with cancer undergoing treatment or who received an SCT at the University of Kansas Cancer Center in Kansas City, blood samples were obtained before 433 patients received a messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccine (BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273), after the first dose of the mRNA vaccine, and 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months after the second dose. Blood samples were also obtained 2, 4, and 7 months after 17 patients received the JNJ-78436735 vaccine. For patients receiving a third dose of an mRNA vaccine, blood samples were obtained 30 days after the third dose. Interventions: Blood samples and BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, or JNJ-78436735 vaccines. Main Outcomes and Measures: Geometric mean titers (GMTs) of the anti-RBD; the ratio of GMTs for analysis of demographic, disease, and treatment variables; the percentage of neutralization of anti-RBD antibodies; and the correlation between anti-RBD and nAb responses to the COVID-19 vaccines. Results: This study enrolled 453 patients (mean [SD] age, 60.4 [13,1] years; 253 [56%] were female). Of 450 patients, 273 (61%) received the BNT162b2 vaccine (Pfizer), 160 (36%) received the mRNA-1273 vaccine (Moderna), and 17 (4%) received the JNJ-7846735 vaccine (Johnson & Johnson). The GMTs of the anti-RBD for all patients were 1.70 (95% CI, 1.04-2.85) before vaccination, 18.65 (95% CI, 10.19-34.11) after the first dose, 470.38 (95% CI, 322.07-686.99) at 1 month after the second dose, 425.80 (95% CI, 322.24-562.64) at 3 months after the second dose, 447.23 (95% CI, 258.53-773.66) at 6 months after the second dose, and 9224.85 (95% CI, 2423.92-35107.55) after the third dose. The rate of threshold neutralization (≥30%) was observed in 203 of 252 patients (80%) 1 month after the second dose and in 135 of 166 patients (81%) 3 months after the second dose. Anti-RBD and nAb were highly correlated (Spearman correlation coefficient, 0.93 [0.92-0.94]; P < .001). Three months after the second dose, anti-RBD titers were lower in male vs female patients (ratio of GMTs, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.34-0.81]), patients older than 65 years vs patients 50 years or younger (ratio of GMTs, 0.38 [95% CI, 0.25-0.57]), and patients with hematologic malignant tumors vs solid tumors (ratio of GMTs, 0.40 [95% CI, 0.20-0.81]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, after 2 doses of an mRNA vaccine, anti-RBD titers peaked at 1 month and remained stable over the next 6 months. Patients older than 65 years of age, male patients, and patients with a hematologic malignant tumor had low antibody titers. Compared with the primary vaccine course, a 20-fold increase in titers from a third dose suggests a brisk B-cell anamnestic response in patients with cancer.

Clinical and Biomarker Results from Phase I/II Study of PI3K Inhibitor Alpelisib plus Nab-paclitaxel in HER2-Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: PIK3CA mutations are common in breast cancer and promote tumor progression and treatment resistance. We conducted a phase I/II trial of alpelisib (α-specific PI3K inhibitor) plus nab-paclitaxel in patients with HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer (MBC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients had HER2-negative MBC with any number of prior chemotherapies. Phase I was 3+3 dose-escalation design with three dose levels of alpelisib (250, 300, and 350 mg) daily plus nab-paclitaxel 100 mg/m2 administered on days 1, 8, and 15 every 28 days. Phase II was according to Simon's two-stage design. PIK3CA mutations in tumor/circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) were assessed. Primary endpoints were recommended phase II dose (RP2D) and objective response rate (ORR). Additional endpoints included safety, pharmacokinetics, progression-free survival (PFS), and association of PIK3CA mutation with outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 43 patients were enrolled (phase I, n = 13 and phase II, n = 30). A total of 84% had visceral disease and 84% had prior taxane. No dose-limiting toxicities occurred in phase I. RP2D was alpelisib 350 mg daily plus nab-paclitaxel 100 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15. Hyperglycemia (grade 3, 26% and grade 4, 0%), neutropenia (grade 3, 23% and grade 4, 7%), diarrhea (grade 3, 5% and grade 4, 0%), and rash (grade 3, 7% and grade 4, 0%) were the most common adverse events. Among 42 evaluable patients, ORR was 59% (complete response, 7% and partial response, 52%), 21% of whom had response lasting >12 months; median PFS was 8.7 months. A total of 40% of patients demonstrated tumor and/or ctDNA PIK3CA mutation; patients with tumor/ctDNA mutation demonstrated better PFS compared with those without mutation (11.9 vs. 7.5 months; HR, 0.44; P = 0.027). Patients with normal metabolic status had longer PFS compared with prediabetic/diabetic patients (12 vs. 7.5 months; P = 0.014). No pharmacokinetics interactions were detected. CONCLUSIONS: The alpelisib plus nab-paclitaxel combination was well tolerated and shows encouraging efficacy, especially in patients with PIK3CA-mutated tumor/ctDNA. The impact of metabolic status on response to this combination merits further investigation.

Randomized Phase II Trial of Anthracycline-free and Anthracycline-containing Neoadjuvant Carboplatin Chemotherapy Regimens in Stage I-III Triple-negative Breast Cancer (NeoSTOP).

PURPOSE: Addition of carboplatin (Cb) to anthracycline chemotherapy improves pathologic complete response (pCR), and carboplatin plus taxane regimens also yield encouraging pCR rates in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). Aim of the NeoSTOP multisite randomized phase II trial was to assess efficacy of anthracycline-free and anthracycline-containing neoadjuvant carboplatin regimens. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients aged ≥18 years with stage I-III TNBC were randomized (1:1) to receive either paclitaxel (P) weekly × 12 plus carboplatin AUC6 every 21 days × 4 followed by doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide (AC) every 14 days × 4 (CbP → AC, arm A), or carboplatin AUC6 + docetaxel (D) every 21 days × 6 (CbD, arm B). Stromal tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (sTIL) were assessed. Primary endpoint was pCR in breast and axilla. Other endpoints included residual cancer burden (RCB), toxicity, cost, and event-free (EFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: One hundred patients were randomized; arm A (n = 48) or arm B (n = 52). pCR was 54% [95% confidence interval (CI), 40%-69%] in arm A and 54% (95% CI, 40%-68%) in arm B. RCB 0+I rate was 67% in both arms. Median sTIL density was numerically higher in those with pCR compared with those with residual disease (20% vs. 5%; P = 0.25). At median follow-up of 38 months, EFS and OS were similar in the two arms. Grade 3/4 adverse events were more common in arm A compared with arm B, with the most notable differences in neutropenia (60% vs. 8%; P < 0.001) and febrile neutropenia (19% vs. 0%; P < 0.001). There was one treatment-related death (arm A) due to acute leukemia. Mean treatment cost was lower for arm B compared with arm A (P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: The two-drug CbD regimen yielded pCR, RCB 0+I, and survival rates similar to the four-drug regimen of CbP → AC, but with a more favorable toxicity profile and lower treatment-associated cost.

Axillary reverse mapping: a prospective study in women with clinically node negative and node positive breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: The primary aim of axillary reverse mapping (ARM) is to prevent lymphedema by preserving arm versus breast axillary lymphatics. Concerns regarding feasibility and oncologic safety have limited the adoption of the technique. This prospective study was undertaken to investigate ARM in clinically node negative and node positive breast cancer patients. METHODS: A total of 184 patients underwent 212 ARM procedures: 155 sentinel lymph node biopsies (SLNB) without axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) (group 1) and 57 ALNDs with/without SLNB (group 2). ARM lymphatics were not preserved if they were a SLN, directly entered a SLN, or were within ALND boundaries during ALND. RESULTS: SLN with radioisotope alone was successful in 92 % of procedures (181 of 197). ARM identification was 47 % (73 of 155) in group 1. Criteria were met in 30 % (47 of 155) for preservation, and 25 % (38 of 155) were preserved. Of those who met preservation criteria, 81 % (38 of 47) were preserved. In group 2, ARM identification was 72 % (41 of 57); 7 met criteria for preservation and were preserved. Of the ARM nodes, 10 % (22 of 212) were SLNs (crossover). ARM nodes contained metastatic disease in one crossover and two nonsentinel ARM nodes in clinically node positive patients with N2/N3 disease. CONCLUSIONS: ARM is a feasible technique for identification and preservation of axillary arm lymphatics with an acceptable incidence of SLN crossover. A larger sample size is needed to determine if ARM can reduce the incidence of lymphedema in patients undergoing SLNB alone and to confirm the absence of ARM metastases in clinically node negative patients undergoing ALND.